meant to pelosi. a lot of kudos to the president as well, but nancy pelosi played a major role. i could go on and on. that the policy is a prolific and is a wonderful leader. -- nancy pelosi is a prolific and wonderful leader. host: thank you so much for joining us today. that is our show for the "washington journal." we will take you now live to the house floor. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012] chaplain, father conroy. chaplain conroy: let us pray. eternal god, we give you thanks for giving us another day. we come to the end of a week during which some members of this people's house have come to complete their service in the congress and others have

come to prepare for their opportunity to serve this great nation. it is a time of tremendous transition, a time thought with trendation and some uncertainty. send your spirit of peace and calm, let all might have confidence in your faithfulness to us and no matter what lies ahead, your grace is abundantly available. now we approach a week during which all americans will regather to remember who we are , a nation generously blessed not only by you, our god, but by courageous ancestors, faithful allies and the best good wishes of people everywhere who long for freedom , who would glory in the difficult work of participated government and who do not enjoy

the bounty that we are privileged to possess. bless the members of this assembly and us all that we would be worthy of the call we have been given as americans. help us all to be truly thankful and appropriately generous in our response. may all that is done this day be for your greater honor and glory. amen. the speaker: the chair has examined the journal of the last day's proceedings and announces to the house his approval thereof. pursuant to clause 1 of rule 1 the journal stands approved. the pledge of allegiance today will be led by the gentleman from california, mr. mcnerney. mr. mcnerney: i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under god, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. the speaker: the chair will

entertain up to five requests for one-minute speeches on each side. for what purpose does the gentleman from south carolina rise? mr. wilson: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker: without objection, so ordered. mr. wilson: mr. speaker, yesterday members of the house foreign affairs committee, led by chairwoman ileana ross schneiderman, heard about the attack on our embassy in benghazi, libya. this resulted in the death of four corner american heroes. sadly -- four american heroes. the people deserve answers as to what happened on the evening of september 11, 2012. why did the administration not make an immediate response in the area of the consulate as requested during the six-hour attack? why did the administration place blame on a video rather than reveal that it was an organized terrorist attack in why has the administration failed to provide answers to valid questions after two

months of inquiry as requested by house armed services committee chairman buck mckeon? it's my hope that the appropriate officials of this had administration will appear before congress and provide answers the american people deserve. in conclusion, god bless our troops and we will never forget september 11 and the global war on terrorism. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from rhode island rise? mr. cicilline: madam speaker, i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. cicilline: madam speaker, earlier this week our nation observed veterans day. as we honor all the brave men and women who have worn the uniform of the united states armed forces, we are especially mindful of all those who laid down their lives in defense of our freedom. in just the past year rhode island families were forced to say goodbye to two loved ones taken from us while serving in afghanistan. they are american heroes who made the ultimate sacrifice for a country they loved. and so now it falls to us those privileged to serve in this

chamber to keep the commitments and promised made to our veterans, for all the bravery and dedication they served us, they should know that we will support their children and they can retire with economic security. as we talk about ways to reduce the size of our federal deficit, it's important we retain programs for veterans and their families. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from texas rise? mr. poe: request unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. poe: madam speaker, sirens whailed a warning as over 300 rockets from hamas in gaza rained down on israel this week. israelies were injured and at least one was killed. but it sure is right -- absolute right of self-defense is responded to defend its people. prime minister netanyahu said it best. the terrorists are committing a double war crime. they fire at israeli citizens and they hide behind

palestinianian civilians. but the government in egypt, which was backed by the administration, has condemned israel, not hamas. the terrorist group hamas doesn't want peace with israel. it wants war. it kills israeli citizens and then hides behinds the skirts of palestinian women. israel has the moral right and duty to defend itself from the bar barrack hamas. the united states should be in total support of israel, our ally. the u.s. should be bold in its condemnation of hamas and the u.s. should be bold in this continuing war by terrorist, like hamas, on civilized nations and that's just the way it is. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from oregon rise? the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. blumenauer: thank you, madam speaker.

perhaps one of the best parts of serving in congress is the access to our library, the library of congress, the dedicated staff at c.r.s., the magnificent reading room. the library of congress is a national treasure. and leading the library of congress is dr. james billington. he was a scholar and institutional leader before assuming leadership of the library of congress 25 years ago. as chair of the library of congress caucus, it's been a great pleasure to work with dr. billington and his outstanding staff on a variety of issues and activities for members of congress. the caucus urges you to join speaker boehner today in the rayburn room at 11:00 a.m. as he honors dr. james billington and his exemplary quarter

century of leadership at the library of congress. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from new jersey rise? the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> madam speaker, i rise to congratulate mr. wade martin of montgomery township, new jersey, for being awarded the 2012 land trust alliances prestigious national conservation service award for his significant contributions to the advancement of land conservation. mr. lance: using his position as financial advisor, mr. martin is educating his clients to the benefits of land preservation. his provided land trust and owners across new jersey for the benefit of land conservation. wade martin has taken his innovative land model nationwide to other financial advisors and their clients explore various options in preserving their land and their families' legacies, increasing the pace of land conservation. i ask all of my colleagues to

join me in honoring wade martin as one of the nation's land conservation leaders and this year's national conservation service award winner. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from california rise? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> madam speaker, i rise today to bring your attention to an exciting new project, mathematics of planet earth, which begins in 2013, more than 100 different organizations from around the world have come together to outline mathematics' integral role in solving real world issues including energy freedom, medical challenges and weather events. as someone who went went on to work in renewable energy for two decades, i know that mathematics can be an essential feature to find solutions to many challenges facing humanity. mr. mcnerney: it will spotlight

the importance of mathematics. the national focus on science, technology, engineering and mathematics education will ensure the united states remains global competitive force in the marketplace. people across our nation are working together to create a better world, and it's important their efforts be recognized and supported. i encourage my colleagues to join me in recognizing the benefits and goals of the mathematics of planet earth project. thank you, madam speaker. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania rise? >> i ask permission to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> thank you, madam speaker. i rise to urge my colleagues here in the house of representatives and citizens all across the united states to join in an unambiguous message to support israel in this time of great and dramatic concern and rising tensions in the gaza strip. look, the facts are clear. the 400 rocket that have been

launched into -- from gaza into israel over the last 48 hours represent a dramatic provocation of israel and its people. second, the use of long-range missiles for the first time reaching into population centers like tel aviv represent an irresponsible escalation of the acts of terrorism that have been generated by hamas and underscored by iran. today, we must send an unambiguous signal that we stand with israel and the right to defend itself and make sure we simultaneously call on those who are coming into gaza from egypt with the message that they have a responsibility to begin the process immediately, of de-ess can lating this conflict, standing shoulder to shoulder for peace and making sure this escalation does not lead to further provocation. mr. meehan: i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired.

for what purpose does the gentleman from connecticut rise? the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> thank you, madam speaker. mr. courtney: madam speaker, how does $7 for a gallon of milk sound? well, that's where we're headed on january 1 if we don't pass a farm bill. why haven't we passed a farm bill? because the house republican leadership has refused to bring it up for a vote on this floor. despite the fact that the senate on june 19 passed a bipartisan farm bill that protects a safe, stable food supply for this country and save $23 billion for the federal budget deficit. in the meantime, we've had 13 weeks of recess. the 2008 farm bill has expired. and for dairy farmers who are facing record feed and fuel costs, they have had their complete market collapse beneath their feet. and we're going to have $7 a gallon milk on january 1 if we don't act. madam speaker, let's look at the example of dairy farmers who get up every single day and engage in some of the hardest work in our economy, let's get the house to work between now and december 16, pass a farm bill, provide a horizon for

rural america. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from minnesota rise? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. walz: i, too, echo the sentiments of my friend from new england. those out in the great plains out in minnesota asked to pass a farm bill also. the american people spoke last week. i didn't run into a single voter -- i don't know if you did, madam speaker -- who said, what i want you guys to do is mess around some more, kick the can down the road, that's what we enjoy. what they said was, compromise, get something done, give us stability and move forward. as my colleague said, six months ago the senate passed a bipartisan farm bill. they couldn't agree today was friday in the senate, and they passed a farm bill. we passed it out of the ag committee 35-11. we have now sat and waited for four months to have a chance to

vote yes for stability in rural america, yes for rural communities, yes for stable food prices, yes for support for drought-stricken farmers or to sit here and do more of the gridlock, more of the do-nothing. when they spoke last week they were very clear am they were not saying we're all for democrats, we're all for republicans. they said we're all for this country doing its business and moving forward. i encourage our colleagues, get a farm bill on the floor, pass it, move on. thank you. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from indiana, mr. burton, seek recognition? mr. burton: madam speaker, pursuant to house resolution 808, i call up the bill h.r. 6156 and ask for its immediate consideration. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: union calendar number 454, h.r. 6156, a bill to authorize the extension of nondiscriminatory treatment, normal trade relations treatment, to products of the russian federation and moldova and to require reports on the compliance of the russian federation with its obligations as a member of the world trade

organization, and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to house resolution 808, the amendment in the nature of a substitute consisting of the text of rules committee print 112-33 is adopted. the bill as amended is considered as read. the bill shall be debatable for 90 minutes with 60 minutes equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the committee on ways and means and 30 minutes equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the committee on foreign affairs. the gentleman from michigan, mr. camp, and the gentleman from michigan, mr. levin, each will control 30 minutes. the gentleman from indiana, mr. burton, and the gentleman from california, mr. berman, each will control 15 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from indiana, mr. burton. .

mr. burton: i'm very happy to yield to the very confident leader of the foreign affairs committee, ms. ros-lehtinen, for so much time as she may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the the gentlewoman from florida is recognized for such time she may consume. ms. ros-lehtinen: i thank the gentleman from indiana for the time. i plan to vote for this bill, h.r. 6156, even though i remain strongly opposed to granting russia permanent normal trade relations or pntr, at this time. i would like to explain the reasons why. those who argued for granting russia pntr, which has until now been prevented by what is known as the jackson-vanik amendment, focus on the supposedly bilateral trade benefits. the issue that concerns me and many members is not trade but human rights. advocates of repeal say that the jackson-vanik amendment is outdated and is purely symbolic and therefore should be

disregarded. but in the ira of human rights, madam speaker, symbols can have a very great importance. over the years jackson-vanik has become a sign of the continuing u.s. commitment to human rights in russia and elsewhere. repealing the amendment could very well be interpreted as an indication that our commitment is now weakening. this would be a terrible signal to send at a time when putin is in the process of imposing ever tighter restrictions on all opposition to his regime, especially democratic activists and any others who dare to defy the authorities. i also oppose granting russia aren't -- pntr at this time because it is but one more concession by the united states in pursuit of the president's failed reset of relations with moscow, which among other measures, includes the one-sided new start treaty, the retrenching of nato's planned missile defense system against

iranian missiles, and russia's entry into the world trade organization. now moscow is being given pntr even as it pursues policies in iran and elsewhere that undermine u.s. interest. nevertheless, despite my objections i will vote for the bill because it is the only way of securing passage for h.r. 4405, the magnitsky act, which has been incorporated into this bill as title 4. by requiring the president to publicly identify and impose sanctions on human rights violators in russia, especially those involved in the death of sergei magnitsky and the subsequent cover-up, this legislation will make clear that the u.s. remains fully committed to advancing democracy and human rights in that country. these are more than just symbolic steps. the it comes from the threats by the kremlin of retaliation if congress dares to act because the regime fears that senior

officials will be publicly implicated. the administration tried very hard to prevent the magnitsky act from moving forward and gave way only when faced with overwhelming bipartisan support for it in both the house and the senate, making it a precondition for passage of pntr. in particular, the administration has tried to remove a requirement that the list of officials and others be made public and has pushed hard to be allowed to keep some of those names classified. but keeping the names secret is exactly what kremlin hopes to do. therefore although the legislation does allow the president to put the names of some violators on a classified list, this exception can only be used when the president determines that it is vital to u.s. national security interest and he must justify such actions -- action to us in the congress. so to erase any doubt, let me state for the record that the clear intent of congress is that

this exception will be used only in rare cases and that misuse by the administration will quickly prompt a strong response. let me close by saying, madam speaker, that on this third anniversary of the death of sergei magnitsky while in police custody, we in congress are united in our support for those fighting for democracy and human rights in russia, and will stand with them in this time of repression until they have triumphed and their country has taken its rightful place among the democracies of the world. and with that, mr. chairman, i thank you for the time and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady yields back. who asks for time? >> i continue to reserve our time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california, mr. berman, is recognized. mr. berman: thank you, madam

speaker. i yield myself four minutes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for four minutes. mr. berman: madam speaker, i rise in support of h.r. 6156, the russia mull dovea jackson-vanik repeal and sergei magnitsky rule of law accountability act of 2012. the jackson-vanik amendment is is a good example of the power of legislation to promote positive change. in 1974 when it was adopted, the right to emigrate was being denied to many people in many nonmarket countries, most notably the soviet union. by limiting normal trade relations, jackson-vanik helped pressure countries to change their restrictive immigration policies and in the case of soviet union, to allow the immigration of soviet jews and many other groups previously precluded from leaving to go to the united states, to israel, and other countries. we continue to have very serious

concerns about human rights situation in russia, but as the specific root causes of jackson-vanik no longer exists, it has been waived for russia every year since 1989. the important piece of legislation we are considering today repeals the jackson-vanik amendment with respect to russia and moldova, grants russia permanent normal trade relations, and includes an important new provision to address human rights violations in russia. adherence to accepted standards of both trade and human rights are important to america and to a fruitful u.s.-russia relationship. russia joins the w.t.o. in august of this year, and is now subject to w.t.o. fair trade disciplines and dispute resolution procedures. enactment of this bill is necessary for u.s. exporters to benefit from the w.t.o. rules and the enhanced market access in pursuing trade with russia.

it will also afford us an additional mechanism to protect intellectual property rights, including over the internet. although russia once was a small player in world trade, its imports have shot up by 80% since 2005. 20% just last year. if we don't pass this bill, american companies will be operating at a disadvantage and have a harder time tapping into this growing market. this is also an important step for strengthening democratic new orleans -- norms in russia. over the past several years the russian people have demonstrate add new-found confidence in questioning their government. we hope that increased trade with western nations, including the u.s., will bring greater transparency to the russian economic system and it will help grow the middle class, which is at the forefront of demanding improved democratic governance and the rule of law. regrettably, russia remains one of the least free countries in

europe, and it is important that we continue to raise serious concerns about its dismal record on democracy, human rights, and the rule of law. in addition to sergei magnitsky's tragic death, we are deeply concerned about a range of human rights violations, including killings, detention, torture of those expressing opposing views, the serious irregularities in election, and legislation enacted by several city councils, including st. petersburg, to restrict the rights of russia's lgbt community. the magnitsky provisions would place restrictions on the financial activities and travel of russians connected to various human rights violations. the names of these human rights violators will be publicly available unless the administration determines that the individual must be placed on a classified list. the intent of these provisions is for the administration to use the classified list only under the prescribed set of

circumstances outlined in the bill, and our expectation is that the use of the classified list will be the exception not the rule. madam speaker, i support this legislation and encourage my colleagues to support it as well. i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from indiana. mr. burton: madam speaker, i ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and insert extraneous material on the bill h.r. 6156. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. mr. burton: with that, let me yield whatever time he may consume, the gentleman from california, leader on the foreign affairs committee, mr. royce. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california is recognized for such time as he may consume. mr. royce: thank you, madam speaker. please excuse my voice today but i did want to rise in support of this legislation and also to associate myself with the observations made by my

colleague, congressman berman. and certainly with congressman burton. the legislation here that was originally enacted in 1974, congressman howard berman's quite direct, during this cold war did play a very key role with respect to immigration. but today that is long over and with russia joining the w.t.o. in august, we have a problem here in the united states. and that is russia in doing so made tariff cuts for every country in the world except the united states. this bill would correct that. of course without this legislation, exporters here in the united states would lose. i never viewed jackson-vanik as an impediment to russia relations today, but neither do

i see it as very helpful in pressing russia on issues like iran or their conduct towards syria. russian opposition level leaders, however, and russian civil society, and the russian press, what free press remains in russia today really support this legislation. and i think what this legislation intends is sort of a mutually beneficial relationship with russia based on a rule of law. based on human rights. that's the hope. it includes the sergei magnitsky legislation that came out of the foreign affairs committee of which i am an original co-sponsor, and i do think we owe a debt of gratitude to chairman ros-lehtinen for her determination to have that

provision in the legislation. and i think if we reflect on the words of the russian opposition in their parliament, one said recently, this provision is very pro-russian. it helps defend us in russia from criminals. it helps defend us from criminals who kill our citizens, who steal our money, and hide it abroad. and that's the point. that's what we are trying to do with that provision. and this bill liberalizing trade while at the same time staying true to human rights, should have passed months ago. sometimes we have a debate with the administration and this particular case it was a question of sort of quiet diplomacy with russia or whether we were going to speak out forcefully on these human rights provisions. i do not prefer silence on issues such as time -- this.

i think the systemic corruption we are seeing today in moscow and the abuse of power we are seeing from the regime really demand inclusion of these provisions. i think thankfully a bipartisan group in congress, including howard berman, including ros-lehtinen and others, stuck it out, came together on this, and ensured the inclusion in this bill of this -- these provisions in memory of sergei. in order to take a stand, and i think that is the right course. i thank you, madam speaker. i encourage all my colleagues to pass this legislation. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from california. is recognized. mr. berman: madam speaker, i yield myself 15 seconds. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. berman: i just want to take

time -- i'm going to yield two minutes to the gentleman from massachusetts, he's the co-chair of the tom lantos commission on human rights, but i think particularly i want to recognize him because among -- in addition to everyone named so far, a very key player in all this was this gentleman, the gentleman from massachusetts. he made tremendous efforts -- the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. mr. berman: i now yield to the chairman of the tom lantos commission on human rights, a gentleman who has worked on this bill for three years, who has been a leader on human rights issues all over the world as we move to passage now, mr. mcgovern, with thanks for his efforts and passion over this part of the legislation. two minutes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from massachusetts is recognized for two minutes. . mr. mcgovern: i want to thank the chairman of the foreign

affairs committee and for his support on this and so many different issues. it is a prifrpbled to serve with him. i also want to thank the chairwoman of the foreign affairs committee, ileana ross schneiderman, and in both of these individuals were responsible -- ileana ross late in an, and both of these individuals were responsible for making sure that the magnitsky rule was workable and it's a major piece of human rights legislation. i am grateful for their leadership. it is the third anniversary of sergei magnitsky and whose honor title 4 is named. he died on november 16, 2009, after enduring torture and beatings while imprisoned for blowing the whistle on the largest tax fraud in russian history. he did the right thing and he paid for it with his life at the hands of brutal and corrupt russian officials. his case remains in impunity. under title 4 of this bill, the

united states will not stand by silently and let his killers and abusers and those who covered up these crimes get away with it. those identified for being responsible for these crimes will be named, their assets frozen and a visa ban imposed and we will not be acting alone. on september 26, the european parliament issued a recommendation saying that the e.u. had had a common list in the cover-up of sergei magnitsky's death and a worldwide visa ban and freeze any financial assets they may hold inside the european union. but let me be perfectly clear, this bill is not simply about the case of sergei magnitsky. it applies to all those who engaged in gross human rights violations or corruption. it is precedent setting human rights legislation. the house should be proud for what it is accomplishing today for human rights, for the rule of law, for the magnitsky family, for the russian people,

for honorable russian owe ferbles and for human rights defenders inside and outside russia. because this bill includes the magnitsky act, and i ask my colleagues to vote for h.r. 6156, and i ask unanimous consent to insert the european parliament's report and an article for the american enterprises into the record at this point. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. mcgovern: and, madam speaker, if i could ask the gentleman from california for an additional two minutes so i could -- mr. berman: i yield the gentleman an additional two minutes for the purposes of a colloquy. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for two minutes. mr. mcgovern: just to clarify the congressional content about the use of classified antics mentions in 404-c-2 in h.r. 6156. it would hold accountable magnitsky's killers and other human rights violators by placing targeted sanctions on them. the bill imposes a visa ban and an asset freeze on individuals responsible for participating in or covering up sergei magnitsky's detention, abuse and death, an on individuals

responsible for certain other gross violations of human rights. as part of that accountability, section 404 requires the president to publish a list of the people responsible for those particular abuses. it is my understanding that the congressional intent behind title 4 is for people subject to sanctions to be placed on an unclassified list in a transparent manner, and that any classified antics may be used only as an exception, not the rule. the administration may list a person only if the president determines it is absolutely vital to the national security interest of the united states and provides congress with prior notice of justification. i yield to the floor manager for the majority, mr. burton, such time as he requires to clarify his own understanding. mr. burton: yes, madam speaker. i share the gentleman's understanding of congressional intent as reflected in the text of 404-c. the list of sanctionable individuals is meant to be unclassified, and any classified antics should be

used only as an exception. mr. mcgovern: i yield to the floor manager for the minority, mr. berman, such time to clarify his understanding. mr. berman: i thank the gentleman for yielding, and, madam speaker, that is also my understanding. the intent of congress is to place people in the classified antics only if the president determines to the relevant committees that it is vital for the national security interests of the united states. mr. mcgovern: reclaiming my time. i thank the gentlemen for their assurances and clarifications. i want to thank this congress, the bipartisan for this magnitsky act i think makes it clear if the united states stands for anything we stand for human rights. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from indiana. mr. burton: madam speaker, i'm very happy to yield to one of the real leaders on the foreign affairs committee, mr. smith of new jersey, two minutes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new jersey is recognized for two minutes. mr. smith: madam speaker, almost 40 years ago we heard

the cries of jewish people trapped behind the iron curtain and passed the jackson-vanik amendment. it was a congressional initiative opposed by the white house which sought reset at all costs. at that time it was quality datant with russia. it's a sad comment on what the russian people continue to suffer now more than 40 years after the collapse of the soviet union, we meet in the same house chamber to struggle with similar issues. russia is now a market economy and permits immigration, but human rights and the rule of law is trampled with impunity and often violence. since jackson vackin -- jackson-vanik, doesn't address russia's current problems, we need a new tool. the one should be evident to anyone who follows the news, madam speaker. the magnitsky provisions on the trade bill we are considering provide such a tool. and these tools couldn't be timely as some lament and

perceive the decline in american influence abroad. the magnitsky sanctions shouldn't cost us a dime, and the house from the kremlins suggest we're onto something. while threats like cutting off military aid or cooperation mean nothing to the russians, it's elite deeply value access to the west. the privilege of the u.s. visa affords a measure of respectability as well as the quick exit for those who worry daily that somebody may be held to account for the crimes against their countrymen. corrupt russian officials know better than to keep their for turns inside russia, risking confiscation by other corrupt officials. the penalties imposed by jackson-vanik apply to the entire russian economy, but those envisioned by the magnitsky legislation look to personal responsibility and target the individual bad actor. what this bill is saying is that murderers and torturers

are not welcomed in this country. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. mr. smith: that the publicly naming these individuals would seem to hurt our interest, it's a great bill, hopefully good, strong, bipartisan support. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california. mr. berman: madam speaker, could i ask how much time each side has? the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california has 6 3/4 minutes. the gentleman from indiana has 4 1/2 minutes remaining. mr. berman: madam speaker, i yield three minutes to the ranking member of the europe subcommittee, europe andure asia subcommittee, my friend from new york, mr. meeks. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new york is recognized for three minutes. mr. meeks: thank you, madam speaker. i want to first thank ranking member howard berman for his leadership on this as well as chairwoman ros-lehtinen. i ask my colleagues to support

the h.r. 6156. granting trade with russia and muldova is long overdue. we need to put asidelong-standing messages of the cold war. i express normal trade with muldova. when muldova entered the world trade organization, congress failed to repeal the jackson-vanik amendment. muldova is a western-oriented, fully democratic country and they need to be treated as an economic partner so we can strengthen our ties to her further. we heard about the economic, human rights and foreign policy implications of this bill, and russia will be at the center of debate. but i hope we do not lose sight of this most basic point. at its core, today's vote on russia's pntr, the fact thrat

house deliberated for so long to bring h.r. 6156 to the floor is an indication this is still an important relationship. in 1974 when the jackson-vanik amendment was enacted, there was a soviet union and the purpose of the amendment was to end the soviet union's policy that prevented the immigration of jews. the objective has long since been met, and since 1991, russia terminated fees on russian immigrants. this is why since 1992, the united states has certified that russia complies with jackson-vanik and we have normal trade relations with russia. the bill before us today simply makes that policy permanent. it also replaces the human rights policy of a bygone era with a more appropriate one for the issues in russia today. in so doing, we allow u.s. companies to take advantage of the market opening and tariff reducing commitment that were part of the russian's w.t.o. package, and we uphold our long standing commitment to protecting human rights and human dignity.

madam speaker, we are nearly three months behind our biggest global competitors. the u.s. is one of the over 150 w.t.o. members -- is the only one, the only one that did not immediately benefit from russia's joining the w.t.o. we are the only one. and only until we repeal jackson-vanik, russia has the right to suspend all agreed upon w.t.o. trade concessions with regard to the u.s. we are talking about losing out on hundreds of millions of dollars alone. now, passage of this bill will expand our engagement with russia and better facilitate the exporting of our goods but trade is never, it is never just about the movement of goods and services. it is also about the transformative flow of people, ideas, best practices and values. increased trade may be most efficient way yet to promote rule of law, fight corruption, support human rights and inspire civil society in russia. with passage of 6156 we get beyond the jackson-vanik

amendment, a cold war relic and level the playing field for american businesses and provide encouragement. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. mr. meeks: and therefore, i ask my colleagues to support this bill. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from indiana is recognized. mr. burton: madam speaker, i'm very happy to now yield to two minutes of the gentleman from california, a member of the foreign affairs committee, mr. rohrabacher. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for two minutes. mr. rohrabacher: thank you very much. the soviet dictatorship collapsed over two decades ago, and i have been disappointed as someone who spent considerable time of my life opposing soviet communism, i have been disappointed to see that many of my own colleagues on both sides of the aisle have never gotten the cold war out of their mind. we have been treating, so many in this body have been treating the soviet -- democratic russia as it is still the soviet union. over the years we should have

established this level of cooperation, especially the economic cooperation that we are codifying today, this should have been established long ago, but instead what happened was the people stuck in the cold war kept villefying the soviet union and -- villeifying the soviet union and exaggerating the shortcoming while ignoring similar flaws, for example, in china. the human rights abuses in china are outrageous, but yet we have moved forward time and again to expand their ability to make money on us, even to steal our technologies with a one-way free trade policy with china. we need to make sure that the people of russia know -- and that's what we're saying today -- the cold war is over. we need to march together forward to meet the challenges of both of our countries, and we open up our economy and economic cooperation with you so we can stand together and prosper and so we can also deal with the challenges of an ever

more powerful and aggressive china and radical islam which is as great a threat and kills as many russians as they do americans. the russian people have to know that after today we have left the cold war behind. we will quit villifying the soviet union and holding a different standard than we do to other countries simply because in the past they were our enemies. madam chairman, i gladly step forward to endorse this expansion of freedom of trade between our peoples. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from california. mr. berman: madam speaker, i have no further requests for time, so i simply need time to close. i don't know if the majority has other requests for time. mr. burton: we have no more speakers.

mr. berman: other than my closing comments. mr. burton: i reserve the right to close. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california is recognized. mr. berman: well, thank you very much, madam speaker. and i just yield myself such time as i may consume to close our side of this debate. . i think this is a very historic piece of bipartisan legislation. just as jackson-vanik became a tool to deal with one aspect of a horrible set of policies by the soviet union during the cold war, we now, using the magnitsky legislation, deal with some very serious human rights issues remaining in russia, but not in the context of restricting trade, but in the context of

deepening our economic relationship with russia. and so i think what this legislation does all together in combination is promote both that economic relationship and promote shared adherence to common standards of human rights, democracy, and the rule of law. i urge its support and yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from indiana. mr. burton: i yield myself the balance of the time, madam speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. burton: russia joint the world trade organization this year. russia's accession will bring 140 million new consumers into the w.t.o.'s international rules-based system. this will help u.s. companies who have been at a disadvantage in competing with their european and asian counterparts in russia. in order to join the w.t.o., russia has been required to make

substantial reforms to open its economy to international investment. these reforms include significant cuts on tariffs impacting manufactured goods and agricultural products, as well as a place to cut farm subsidies in half by 2018. russia must also allow 100% foreign ownership of companies in a diverse group of industry, including banking, telecommunications, and retail. mother importantly, russia will be bound -- more importantly, russia will be bound to respect the intellectual property protections and participate in the organization system for settling trade disputes. as chairman of the subcommittee on europe andure asia, i visited with moscow and met with many american businesses that are already active in russia. whether we pass this bill or not, these companies will remain in russia and the russian market is too big to ignore. however let's make it easier for you -- these companies to do

business in russia. this legislation in addition the peterson institute, a prominent economic think tank, estimates that if we pass this bill and russia receives pntr, u.s. exports to russia will double over the next 10 years -- five years, from $9 billion to $19 billion. this increased trade could support upwards of 50,000 new jobs here in the united states. this legislation requires the secretary of state and the trade representative to provide congress with a number of reports that explain the steps that they have taken to ensure russia is in compliance with the w.t.o. these reports must include updates on what the administration is doing to advocate for american investors in russia, including those investors in the oil company who suffered about $12 billion in losses when the russian government expropriated the company. now regarding mull moldova, this former state of the soviet union

joined the w.t.o. in 2001. however because of jackson-vanik applies to moldova as well as russia, the u.s. has not been able to offer that country prnt -- pntr and this bill will fix that. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. mr. burton: they are now going to be able to participate with the united states in more free trade. i think this is a great bill. i urge my colleagues to support it. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. mr. berman: i yield back. mr. burton: mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman rise? mr. burton: ways and means has

time. i'll deal with it later. the speaker pro tempore: the chair will receive a message. the messenger: madam speaker, a message from the senate. the secretary: madam speaker.

the speaker pro tempore: madam secretary. the secretary: i have been directed by the senate to inform the house that the senate has passed s. 60, providing for a conditional adjournment or recess of the senate and adjournment of the house of representatives in which the concurrence of the house is requested. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan, mr. camp, is recognized. mr. camp: thank you, madam speaker. i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. camp: madam speaker, i urge passage of this bipartisan legislation to ensure that

american companies, workers, farmers, and ranchers benefit from russia's accession to the world trade organization. almost three months ago russia became the 156th member of the w.t.o. since then, exporters from every w.t.o. member but one, the united states, have been guaranteed the benefits from the concession that is russia made to join the w.t.o. these benefits include increase access to russia's growing market, goods, and services, improved protection of intellectual property rights in russia, russian animal and plant health rules based on international standards and science. and binding dispute resolution if russia does not live up to its w.t.o. obligations. if u.s. exporters want to be guaranteed these benefits as well, we must pass this bipartisan legislation and establish permanent normal trade relations with russia. this bill would allow us to gain important rights and powerful

new enforcement tools with respect to one of the world's largest economies, without giving up a single tariff or other concession. we could double or even triple u.s. exports to russia within five years. but until we do, these benefits will go to our foreign competitors where our exporters fall further behind. with our high unemployment, we can't afford to pass up any opportunity to increase our export and create jobs. and the longer we delay in passing this legislation, the more ground our exports will lose. i don't dispute that our relationship with russia has many challenges. on the commercial front, we face weak enforcement and protection of intellectual property rights, as well as discriminatory standard for u.s. agricultural products. russia's recent adoption of the w.t.o.'s rules should address many of these issues, but this bill goes farther by requiring the administration to stay focused on russia by making sure that it lives up to its w.t.o.

obligations, resolving outstanding trade issues with russia, and improve the rule of law in russia. many of us also have significant concerns with russia's foreign policy. much as i believe that russia does not always act responsibly, i also believe that this legislation cannot be seen as rewarding russia. instead, any benefit that is conferred is on u.s. job creators. i also fully share the concerns of many of my colleagues on russia's abysmal human rights record and that's why i support adding the magnitsky legislation to this bill. on the third anniversary of sergei magnitsky while imprisoned. for all these reasons we urgently need to pass this important bipartisan legislation. i urge all my colleagues to support it. madam speaker, i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from michigan, mr. levin, is recognized. mr. levin: thank you so much. i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the

gentleman is recognized. mr. levin: i want to make a number of points first to join with the chairman of the committee. we have worked hard on this on a bipartisan basis, and also with the senate. he so i think these are the important points, if i might say so. first of all, i urge that we take each trade agreement very much on its own, maybe not completely looking at other agreements, but assessing the modes of this particular agreement. when you look at it on its merit, it's clear i urge we should be supportive. if you look at the trade that will be enhanced by this legislation, it's clear that it will be beneficial to our country.

the major imports from our country to russia are machinery, motor vehicles, and aircraft. these are products made in america. by american companies and by american workers. so this will enhance our ability . russia in terms of taking this on its own is already in the w.t.o. and the question is whether we will be able to access their market. the next point also there's a question of enforcement. trade agreements by themselves will not be enough. there has to be built in strong enforcement and a willingness to enforce. and this agreement with the help

of colleagues, some of them will be here today, this agreement has strengthened enforcement provisions. and those were worked out with the senate, and i want to thank the senators for working with us. so there is within this agreement not only a garne he tea of more flow but also a guarantee that we havep instrumentalities so we can hold russia's feet to the fire, if i might say so, in terms of their meeting their obligations. the next point is this. we have been working on trade issues for a long time. for some of us, trade is more than the flow of goods. it's a structure within which the flow occurs, and looking at

the benefits of that flow. so they were sure that the impact is a positive one for our businesses and our workers. also it's important to remember that the rule of law in another country is vital, otherwise investment is perilous. the magnitsky legislation was added here in part in recognition that when you talk about trade, you have to look at a fuller picture. and i want to salute, if i might say so, especially jim mcgovern, for his work on this issue. i also want to thank mr. camp, our chairman, i also want to thank those in the senate for working with us to make sure that this is in this bill. that the chair of our foreign relations committee, and also especially mr. cardin, who once

served on our committee. and is now in the senate and has made this a dedicated effort on his part. this is a bipartisan effort. i hope that it will set the stage for an effort and a successful one to deal with trade issues and beyond on a bipartisan basis. i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from michigan. mr. camp: thank you, madam speaker. i thank the gentleman for his comments. also i would yield two minutes to the distinguished chairman of the trade subcommittee, the gentleman from texas, mr. brady. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas is recognized for two minutes. mr. brady: thank you, madam speaker. this is a jobs bill, pure and simple. it levels the playing field in russia for american energy, agriculture, manufacturing services, and our growing

technology industry to be able to compete on a level playing field in that country with our competitors -- china, europe, brazil, and others. this bill means more sales, it's the ninth largest economy in the world. and more jobs here at home as a result of it. america gives up nothing in this legislation but it stands to gain much. trading that level playing field is important to job creation. but this bill also holds russia accountable to live up to its obligations, to play by the same trade rules everyone else in this world does as well. that means a chance to protect and means to insist that our intellectual property rights be protected. to insist that sound science be used and include safety. to insist again that there are not artificial barriers, either the front door or back, to american products and services being sold in russia. . this bill creates important new

tools to continue to pressure russia to create progress on the important issue of human rights. for texas, our state, this is an important issue because russia is our fastest growing trade partner. we are the number one exporter. our growth in sales grew by almost a third last year alone, but it is brighter than that -- broader than that. it's important to every state in the united states, important to our trading relationship, and, again, the fact that we're able to hold russia accountable and should they violate their commitments we have in law the process to resolve those disputes and re-create a level playing field. i want to thank the chairman of the trade subcommittee, mr. dave camp, for his long leadership on trade. this is by my count the seventh bipartisan trade measure to pass this house, and we hope to move to the president's desk, and i thank the ranking member, mr. levin, for his outstanding

work on this as well. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from michigan, mr. levin. mr. levin: i now yield two minutes to the ranking member on trade, mr. mcdermott from the great state of washington. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from washington is recognized for three minutes. mr. mcdermott: madam speaker, i rise in support of this bill to grant permanent normal trade relations to russia and muldova. let's begin with russia. russia joined the w.t.o. this summer. congress does not have veto power on that. all we can do is decide here whether to allow u.s. businesses and workers to see the benefits of russia's w.t.o. obligations. will russia always honor these obligations on its own initiative? probably not. but russia's w.t.o. membership means we can at least hold them to those obligations, and we must be prepared to enforce

those obligations. that is a lesson we learned the hard way over the last few years. this bill actually does that. this bill has strong anti-bribery and anti-corruption provisions. it has mechanisms to help strengthen our intellectual property rights, but that's not all. another critical piece of this bill is the magnitsky act, placing real sanctions on those individuals who are complicit in human rights violations. this is a serious policy upgrade and a big win for human rights. at the end of the day, russia's entry in the w.t.o. can be expected to create real jobs here in the u.s. by reducing tariffs and other barriers to u.s.-made goods and services. the tariffs on information technology products are completely eliminated. russia's aircraft, chemical and pharmaceutical tariffs are heavily reduced. this means real job growth

around the country in the coming years. in many ways, this agreement is one-sided to our benefit. our tariffs are not going down, but russia's are. russia is a w.t.o. member regardless of what we do today, but with this bill we make sure that american businesses and workers get the benefits of russian commitments. finally, this bill gives permanent normal trade relations to muldova, a country that joined the w.t.o. more than a decade ago. the muldovaans want closer ties to their friends in the united states and europe. this bill demonstrates that we share their interests with our muldovan partners. i ask that my colleagues pass this bill unanimously. everyone in this country will benefit from it. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from michigan, mr. camp, is recognized. mr. camp: at this time i yield two minutes to a distinguished member of the ways and means committee, the gentleman from

california, mr. nunes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california is recognized for two minutes. mr. nunes: madam speaker, the 1974 jackson-vanik amendment effectively pressured the soviet union over its appalling human rights record. it was an important part of america's decade-long effort to contain and ultimately bring down an evil empire. times have changed, the cold war is over, and the ussr has given away to the russian federation. its ruler, vladimir putin, presides over an authoritarian regime that closely controls the key economic sectors, shackles the immediate & and stamps out most dissent and stage manages the political process. nevertheless, putin's russia is not the soviet union, and we should update our laws accordingly. the jackson-vanik amendment addresses problems from a different era. by joining the w.t.o., russia has undertaken new obligations to adhere to the rule of law. as we approve normal trade

relations with russia, we must verify that it adheres to its new responsibilities. furthermore, by approving the magnitsky act, we will signal that corrupt thugs who atact whistleblowers and human rights activists will be held to account in america, if not russia. that is why, mr. speaker, i urge my colleagues to vote yes on this bill. and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from michigan, mr. levin, is recognized. mr. levin: i now yield nine minutes to a gentleman who has worked so hard on trade issues, the gentleman from maine, mr. michaud. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from maine is recognized for nine minutes. mr. michaud: i thank the gentleman for yielding. representative delauro and i introduced legislation to increase the specifics and the strength of u.s. enforcement efforts of russia's w.t.o. membership. as our experience with china

has shown, if there isn't a robust enforcement mechanism, american jobs will be lost. i'm pleased that the bill being debated today includes similar language to strengthen our enforcement of russia's w.t.o. membership, but i do have lingering concerns that ustr may be reluctant to fully implement these provisions, both in letter and in spirit. first, i'm worried that ustr may not interpret the bill's reporting requirements in a way that will make it possible for members of congress or american businesses to fully understand russia's w.t.o. commitment. the working party report alone is hundreds of pages and hard to decipher. in addition, i'm concerned that ustr may not include in their report when they decide not to take action against russia, even when they are not in compliance. can you assure me that you will work with me to ensure that members of congress and our

businesses are made aware of all of russia's w.t.o. commitments and whether or not they are in full compliance? i yield to the gentleman. mr. levin: thank you. i very much agree with my colleague from maine. to monitor and fully enforce our trade agreements. and i will work and others will with ustr to keep you and other members of congress informed when russia has not fulfilled its commitments, regardless of whether or not the administration has taken formal notice. mr. michaud: i thank the gentleman for his answer. my next concern is that ustr's reports to congress may not give sufficient attention to russia's compliance with their manufacturer related commitments. i know you and i share a deep commitment to american manufacturing. will my friend work with me to make sure that ustr reports to

congress includes assessments on their compliance with manufacture related obligation? and i yield to the gentleman. levin letch as my colleague -- mr. levin: as my colleague knows, this includes all of russia's commitments prior to joining the w.t.o., including the reduction of tariffs and other commitments relating to manufacturing sectors. i will work with my colleague to make certain that ustr's reports including evaluation of russia's manufacturing related commitments. mr. michaud: i thank my friend for his response, and i know it will come as no surprise that i have approached this legislation and debate with skepticism. since china joined the w.t.o. more than 10 years ago, more than two million jobs have been shipped overseas. although i advocated actions at

the w.t.o., it has not been enough to deal with china's currency manipulation. i don't want this to happen with russia. i think these provisions are a good start, but it will take a proactive congress to make sure those benefits will go through. can my friend assure me that he'll work with me that we will use all the tools available, including section 301 authority, if needed, to make sure that russia lives up to the w.t.o. commitment? and i yield to the gentleman from michigan. mr. levin: i agree with you that we must force our trading partners' commitments so the american workers can compete on a level playing field, and i believe that mr. camp and others concur in that. i, too, have been concerned about the effect china trade relations have had on the u.s. economy, and i will work with you to monitor russia's compliance and to ensure that

u.s. manufacturers get the full benefits of russia's w.t.o. membership. and i can assure you we will continue to work together to address china's violations as well, and this administration has been active in that regard. as for section 301, i wish to note that i and the ranking member on our trade subcommittee, mr. mcdermott, exchanged letters with the u.s. trade rep in july, confirming our rights to request action under section 301. under section 301, ustr is required to respond to our request within a fixed timeline. that exchange of letters has already been incorporated into the legislative history of the bill before us today. mr. michaud: i appreciate the gentleman's comments and i look forward to working with him on these issues. you and i have worked closely

on trade enforcement over the past few years, and i sincerely hope that this effort between our offices will further strengthen our dialogue and collaboration on trade policy going forward. i will be even more important -- it will be even more important to make sure that t.t.p. is a good deal for american workers and that its implementation legislation as well, should it ever reach the floor, including strict enforcement measures. this legislation represents an unprecedented step towards improving enforcement of our trade agreements. i want to thank you for working with us to improve this legislation and for agreeing to work with me on my outstanding concerns that we currently have. as a result of these improvements in the strong human rights language in the bill, i will be supporting this legislation when the house votes on it today. i want to thank the gentleman from michigan very much for his efforts in that regard. mr. levin: and i want to thank

you, mr. show, for your efforts. your arduous efforts. i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan, mr. camp, is recognized. mr. camp: i yield two minutes to a distinguished member of the ways and means committee, the gentleman from california, mr. herger. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california is recognized for two minutes. mr. herger: thank you, chairman camp. madam speaker, the bill before us is about economic growth and job creation. it's about expanding u.s. exports to the ninth largest economy in the world. it's about making sure u.s. businesses receive the same treatment in russia as their competitors in europe. it's about ensuring we have the tools to hold an unreliable trading partner accountable. this legislation is not a handout or gift to russia.

maintaining jackson-vanik does not give us any leverage as russia's already a w.t.o. member. a vote against this bill is a vote against u.s. employers. it's a vote against small businesses. it's a vote against farmers and a vote against ranchers. i urge my colleagues to support legislation to give americans fair access to an important market. i yield back the remainder of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from michigan, mr. levin, is recognized. mr. levin: i now yield two minutes to another member who's been so active on trade policy, mr. neal from massachusetts, two minutes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from massachusetts is recognized for two minutes. mr. neal: thank you, mr. levin. madam speaker, after more than 18 years of negotiations, russia joined the world trade organization this past august. w.t.o. membership will require

russia for the first time to play by the same rules of trade as the united states and virtually every other nation in the world. this is a significant development and it's critical that congress approve permanent normal trade relations with russia so that u.s. companies can benefit from these reforms. russia pntr is also a jobs bill. the president's export council estimate that u.s. goods in exports to russia will double or triple once russia joins w.t.o. that means more jobs and that's exactly what our economy needs right now. a reminder, last year the fastest growing part of the american economy was exports, which grew by almost 6%. let me conclude by expressing my support for important provisions in pntr provisions that has -- when russian took over the assets, the investors,

including 20,000 individual american investors, many from my home state of massachusetts, received nothing. . it requires the pntr and state department to provide an annual report to congress and the steps they are taking to advocate for their investors. this reporting requirement is critical because russia must be pressed to make good on the money it owes american investors. madam speaker, i actually for a long period of time had a bracelet i wore and kept in my office and still have based upon one of the issues at the time that led to jackson-vanik, it was the ability to right of soviet jewry to immigrate from russia if they so desired. we are addressing that issue today. it's one of the human rights champions that we are witnessing today that allowed this to happen. i think you can see how far diplomacy can extend when it's beneficial to the united states,

but also on the issue of immigration at that particular time. it was america and the american dementia that helped to transform that particular moment. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from michigan, mr. camp, is recognized. mr. camp: madam speaker, how much time remains? the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan, mr. camp, has 22 minutes remaining. and the gentleman from michigan, mr. levin, has 14 1/2 minutes remaining. mr. camp: at this time i yield two minutes to a distinguished member of the ways and means committee, the gentleman from washington state, mr. reichert. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from washington is recognized for two minutes. mr. reichert: i thank the gentleman for yielding. madam speaker, i'm speaking in favor of granting russia and moldova permanent normal trade relations. i'd like to emphasize this will hold only benefits as was said for the united states. there is no downside for us in

this agreement. unless we fail to act. now the time has come for us to come together and pass this legislation. as the sponsor of the moldova pntr, i'm pleased that a long overdue graduation of moldova from the jackson-vanik amendment is included in this bill. jim mcdermott and i have worked hard on the moldavia agreement and i'm proud to see this included in this bill. passing this bill will increase americans' exports of goods and services substantially and will serve as a no cost job creator. currently exports to russia support over 1,400 jobs in my home state. in fact, in one year exports from washington state to russia grew by 80%. if, however, we fail to act as u.s. companies, farmers, and workers, they will not receive the benefits of the russian

membership, nor will the united states government have authority to hold russia accountable to its w.t.o. commitments. so, madam speaker, it's my sincere hope that we could pass this legislation, grant russia and moldova permanent normal trade relations. i yield back my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from michigan, mr. levin. mr. levin: it's my pleasure to yield to a gentleman who has served so long with distinction in our committee, mr. rangel, from new york, two minutes. mr. rangel: thank you so much. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new york is recognized for two minutes. mr. rangel: i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. rangel: i rise on the floor because there have been so many people in my constituency that are wondering about why did i vote in support of china going into the united nations -- the w.t.o.? and at the same time we all are

complaining about her failure to abide by the rules. i want to make it abundantly clear we are in the same situation. sandy and i was a "profile in courage" almost to support china and we have consistently supported our position as most people are supporting the committee's position and the congress position as relates to allowing russia to assume the responsibilities of joining the w.t.o.. and while we have no guarantees that she will abide by the rules, at least we do have she recognizes that they are international rules. and for those people that are just monitoring the behavior of the people's republic of china, we have to realize that in order to get people to cooperate and to find some discipline in international trade, they have to join. and this goes a long way in making certain that only that we

create the jobs and improve commercial trade with russia, but also it encourages the administration now to see what works for the great united states, what really works improve the quality of trade between all nations, and gives us another tool to work with. so i want to thank sandy and the chairman of the committee for working together as closely as they have, and mr. mcdermott, and i do hope that we'll be able to join these countries to say that even if america even with communist, and the principles of great policy. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from michigan, mr. camp, is recognized. mr. camp: at this time i yield two minutes to a distinguished member of the ways and means committee, the gentleman from minnesota, mr. paulsen. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from minnesota is recognized for two minutes. mr. paulsen: i'd like to speak

in favor of this legislation but also talk a little bit about why this bill is so important to my home state in minnesota. minnesota's economy has a stake in extending permanent normal trade relation was russia. last year minnesota exported about $71 million worth of goods to russia, directly supporting hundreds of jobs. now with the world's ninth largest economy and a growing middle class, the russian marketplace holds great future potential for increased exports and more minnesota jobs. this august, russia gained memberships of the w.t.o., giving member economies around the globe increased access to nearly 142 million potential customers. but our failure to pass permanent normal trade relation was russia means american job creators, american employers can't take advantage of these new opportunities. there are large and minnesota job creators in minnesota like 3m, t.s.e. container freight, and others that have all

expressed their interest in how important it is that pntr be extended for increased competition and job growth. one great example of an industry that will benefit from extending pntr to russia is our nation's medical device innovators. we understand the immense size of the russian population, but only 20% of russians currently have access to quality health care. and nearly 2/3 of russia's medical equipment is becoming obsolete. there is an incredible opportunity, madam speaker, for u.s. medical technology. now with the accession to the w.t.o., russia has agreed to substantial tariff reductions for imported medical equipment. again, creating a great opportunity for american medical device innovators to increase exports, grow their businesses, and create many new jobs. but unless we pass this legislation, unless we move forward, our competitors will continue to have a distinct and unnecessary advantage. we need to pass pntr with

russia, not only for countless minnesota businesses, trying to compete and win in today's marketplace, but also more importantly for 60,000 minnesota jobs that are tied to a robust trade agenda. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from michigan, mr. levin. mr. levin: i now yield a minute and a half to another member of our committee who is so active on trade issues, mr. blumenauer, from the great state of oregon. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from oregon is recognized for 2 1/2 minutes. 1 1/2 minutes. mr. blumenauer: i appreciate the gentleman's curtcy. you have heard and you will continue to hear how important it is to pass this legislation, to level the playing field for the united states and our businesses with other countries that seek to do business with russia. one of the 10 largest economies in the world. this provides us an additional tool to make sure that our friends in russia play by the rules.

now, while one of the presidential candidates talked about russia being the greatest geopolitical threat to the united states, i think it's clear that times have in fact changed. the relationship between the united states and the -- former soviet union has been dramatically altered. russia is an opportunity for us, it's a challenge. we have differences of opinion. there are issues that we frankly need their cooperation. there are others that we are pushing back a little bit, but it is far better to be engaged in economic competition and cooperation, to help build those bridges. speaking of bridges, i think it's encouraging to watch the debate on this floor today. it's been my pleasure to be involved with a variety of them over the years, but this is one where there is commonality, where there is consensus, where

we are working together to move forward. i hope this forms a pattern by which we'll be able to have future success in critical, thoughtful, trade policy crafting in the future. the american economy needs it. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan, mr. camp, is recognized. mr. camp: thank you. at this time i yield two minutes to a distinguished member of the ways and means committee, the gentleman from illinois, mr. roskam. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from illinois is recognized for two minutes. mr. roskam: i thank the chairman and thank you, madam speaker. madam speaker, a couple months ago i pick up the phone and i'm talking to one of your constituent companies in naperville, illinois. and it's a company that you represented well for the past 14 years, and i was talking to the manufacturer, talking about russian pntr and i posed a simple question. how much business are you doing now?

and what kind of business would you be able to do in russia if we normalize the trade relationships? without batting an eye he said currently, congressman, we do $15 million worth of exports into russia. if congress changes this and we regularize the status, that number overnight would jump to $30 million. the state of illinois currently is one of the largest states as it relates to exports to russia. $70 million worth of business, madam speaker, coming out of our home state. we've got a chance today to do something great. and to do something great is to allow worldwide american companies to get a sure footing in a growing marketplace that's only going to get bigger, and to do it in a thoughtful way. this helps to meet president obama's goal of doubling exports in five years. this is linked to that goal. and this is an opportunity for us to create jobs where we want

to create them, here at home exporting into markets abroad. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from michigan, mr. levin, is recognized. mr. levin: i now yield a minute and a half to another active member of our committee on trade and every issue that comes before us. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from wisconsin is recognized for a minute and a half. mr. kind: thank you, madam speaker. i thank the gentleman for yielding me this time. i want to first commend the chairman and the ranking member of the ways and means committee, mr. camp and mr. levin for the work they did in getting this legislation to the floor. i rise in strong support of extending permanent normal trade relations with russia and moldova. i also want to commend the chair and ranking member of the subcommittee, mr. brady and mr. mcdermott, for the work they have done, as well as the gentleman who is not on the floor today. we are going to miss his leadership. he's retiring at the end of the session, but mr. dreier from california. been a great leader on trade polcy. been a great colleague. we'll miss that leadership and i commend him for his one last lip he put in making this

legislation possible. in a lot of ways i wish we passed this before the august recess, every day we delay right now we are losing market share in a large expanding marketplace in russia. our goods, services, products, the made in america goods that we should be gaining access to right now. we are not until we are able to pass this and russia has already agreed to lower their trade barriers and other nontariff barriers for the entry of our goods. just as one example, great britain alone over the last couple years has expanded their exports in the russian market by over 80%. this legislation will also allow us to enforce rules and have dispute resolution mechanisms that are available to the world trade organization. higher rules that russia now has to comply with. and as another example, from my home state of wisconsin, russia has, since 2010, shut out all dairy exports we could make from our country into russia due to sanitary concerns that we view as highly suspect and questionable. now we'll have a mechanism in

order to resolve that dispute through the w.t.o. may i have an additional 30 seconds? mr. levin: additional 30 seconds. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman has an additional 30 seconds. mr. kind: something that is not available to us until we are able to move this legislation here today. as was pointed out earlier governor romney indicated that russia in his view is america's greatest geostrategic adversary in the 20th century. i don't know if that's true or not, but i do know when goods and products cross borders, armies don't. this gives us another tool of diplomatic engagement with russia, economic engagement with russia, as well as another peace for what we need to do to get our economy fully functioning in creating the good-paying jobs we need right here in america at this time. i encourage my colleagues to support this. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. mr. kind: wide bipartisan vote i thank the leadership on this issue. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan, mr. camp. .

the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for two minutes. >> i rise to speak on h.r. 6156, the jackson-vackic repeal act. i'm very proud to join my friend and colleague, congressman greg meeks, in standing with him in strong support of this legislation. i look forward to serving with him as the co-chair of the russia caucus in the 113th congress. mr. grimm: madam speaker, russia, as we've heard, is one of the largest economies in the world, and passing permanent normal trade relations with russia is a move that would greatly benefit the united states. the world bank is estimated that more than half of russia's 140 million-plus people are middle-class consumers. this legislation creates great opportunities for americans and new york companies. it creates jobs for small businesses in staten island and brooklyn. it increases maritime jobs at

the port of new york. it creates more jobs in the manufacturing and services sector in new york city. new york and russia have a special relationship. last year new york exported $497 million worth of goods to russia which directly supported an estimated 1,400 jobs. additionally, new york city is home to one of the largest russian communities in the united states. and that i am very proud to say i represent. so i urge my colleagues to vote in favor of american jobs and vote aye on h.r. 6156, and, madam speaker, i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from michigan, mr. levin. mr. levin: how much time remains on each side? the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan, mr. levin, has nine minutes. and the gentleman from michigan, mr. camp, has 15 1/2 minutes. mr. levin: mr. chairman, i think i'll proceed. shall i do that?

it's now my pleasure to yield a minute and a half to another vigorous member of our committee on all issues, mr. pascrell from the state of new jersey. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new jersey is recognized for 1 1/2 minutes. mr. levin: we wish your state the best. mr. pascrell: mr. camp, mr. levin, great job for putting this together. i didn't drink the cool aid when i came to ways and means on trade, i'll tell you that. i think this is a major effort on both sides of reconciliation and putting together a good trade bill. so i want to congratulate both of you sincerely. i want to congratulate mr. michaud for making sure -- for seeking the inclusion of tough enforcement provisions. you can have all the trade deals in the world, but if you do not have tough enforcement, they mean very, very little. i'm very concerned about the inbalance of trade with russia, which is trying to be our

partner here. i mean, imports in 2011 were $34.5 billion and exports were only $8.8 billion. i hope we reverse that or change that dramatically with so many items being reduced in terms of what the rates will be. in new jersey, it's very important for us, we export auto parts and medical equipment for russia, for an example, and by them joining the w.t.o. russia tariffs will be lowered for our exports and that helps our workers get to work. and this has always been the major issue in any trade deal. does it hurt our jobs or does it help our jobs? and i'm convinced that this legislation will be of great help to get our trade imbalance down to where we want it to be. but, mr. chairman, and sandy, i'm very concerned about using trade as leverage. the russians have stuck their finger in our eye on the

subject of syria, and i'd like to use trade as leverage to make sure -- the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. mr. pascrell: 10 seconds? the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for 10 seconds. mr. pascrell: i want to make sure that russia does toe the line. this is very serious business. so if we can't get them to move on syria, we have the situation only gets worse. maybe it's hopeful we have a coalition which was formed just a few days ago. so i hope that we will use trade as leverage. thank you very much, madam chair. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan, mr. camp, is recognized. mr. camp: thank you, madam speaker. i yield two minutes to the distinguished gentleman from pennsylvania, mr. kelly. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from pennsylvania is recognized for two minutes. mr. kelly: i thank the gentleman. madam speaker, i rise in strong support. this is what the country expects us to do. today, you don't have to have on a red shirt or blue shirts. these are red, white and blue jobs. we are talking about an

opportunity to compete and not just compete and not just participate but to actually dominate the world market. i want to read from a friend of mine, rick mcneil, who is the chief executive officer of a corporation. it represents 80% of the purchasing power. 92% of the growth and 95% of its consumers. one in three american manufacturing jobs depend on this. in this corporation alone, they increased their sales from $67 million in 2001 to $158 million in 2011. listen, this makes sense for america. this makes sense for the world. when it talks about us, not scrust participating but dominating the world markets, my goodness, does this give us a voice at the table when it talking about human rights and personal liberty. we need to be that strongest voice in the world. there is no other place to look to now for leadership than the united states. we can do that. and by passing this today, we send a strong message not only to the world but to our country

that we have joined hands, we are joining arm in arm and we are going to dominate in the world market and regain our position as the leader when it comes to human rights and personal freedoms and liberty. i thank the gentleman, and i urge all our colleagues on both sides to pass this bill today. thank you and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from michigan. mr. levin is recognized. mr. levin: it's now my pleasure to yield three minutes to the distinguished gentleman from oregon with his passion on all issues, three minutes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for three minutes. mr. defazio: i thank my friend, the gentleman, for the time. we could today on the floor just replay the debate from 11 years ago in the lame-duck session about china. it's about exporting u.s. goods to china. just get them in the w.t.o., give them permanent normal trade relations and they'll follow the rules. well, when we adopted that, our

trade deficit with china was $84 billion, today, it's $295 billion. the issue isn't the tariffs the russians have. the issue wasn't the tariffs that the chinese have. it's all of their manipulation and nontariff barriers that go in these nonmarket economies. how will it be different for russia? we're concerned about syria. so let's reward them with permanent normal trade relations. you can't go to the www.and complain about the russians -- the w.t.o. and complain about the russians supporting the thugs in syria. that's not something you can use the w.t.o. for. we are giving up the tools we have to try and push russia on economic issues. and we're binding ourselves to this international body which has a secret dispute resolution process with unelected bureaucrats who have no conflict of interest rules.

now, that's a powerful tool we're going to use against those russians. it's worked real well against the chinese. it doesn't work against the way the chinese are manipulating their market to keep out our goods, to steal our international property, and all the host of other unfair trade practices there that the russians can just duplicate very easily. the w.t.o. is not the solution to these issues. we have more power today with a bilateral agreement. we have more power today with the capability of depriving them of a normal trade relations status with the united states. if we want to use our clout, we should vote this bill down. it's not just about syria and human rights and a host of other abuses in russia. it's about american jobs. today, the biggest export under the w.t.o. for the last 15 years has been american jobs. how is that going to change by binding us one more time to the

w.t.o. with one more nonmarket, you know, essentially dick at that torial -- dictatorial economy? how will it that work differently? it won't. the tariffs will go away. they'll start buying all our goods. no. not going to happen. all the same abuses that was seen in china will be replicated by the regime in russia, and it will become yet again another large addition to the deficit side of our ledger on trade. i urge members to oppose this. with that i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from michigan, mr. camp, is recognized. mr. camp: thank you. i yield two minutes to a distinguished gentleman from missouri, mr. long. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from missouri is recognized for two minutes. mr. lons: thank you for yielding. -- mr. long: thank you for yielding. madam speaker, we're trading

with russia right now. this doesn't hurt russia. this is to prevent hurting us. this is to help our manufacturers, our farmers. if you took manufacturing and farming out of the united states of america, you wouldn't have a whole lot left. and this -- since russia is in the world trade organization we need to move past that, and i support permanent normal trade relations with russia because permanent normal trade relations is a great opportunity to create new jobs here in america. american workers produce some of the highest quality manufactured and agricultural goods in the united states. pntr will allow our workers to compete on a level playing field, and that's what i'm after, in a new market and give people who are out of work new opportunities to get back on the job. americans work hard and they can compete with any nation in the world given the chance, but it's got to be a fair playing field. pntr will provide that chance to compete fairly in the russian market. we shouldn't be hamstringing

our nation's workers over a technicality stemming from the cold war. americans are suffering right now. they want jobs right now so that they can pay their mortgages and send their children to college and plan for retirement. expanding opportunities for americans to sell products into foreign markets is one of the best ways that we can help relieve americans from the economic hardships that they're now facing. good jobs for americans right here in america is not impossible to accomplish. we can make america the best place in the world to do business if we will remove unnecessary bureaucratic burdens off the backs of american workers. passing pntr will be a very good first step, and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from michigan, mr. levin, is recognized. mr. levin: it's now my pleasure to yield one minute to the gentleman from virginia, deeply involved in trade issues, mr. moran. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from virginia is recognized for one minute. mr. moran: i thank my friend from michigan and thank him for

his very genuine concern over the jobs and labor rights of american workers and for his support of this legislation. madam speaker, today countries all over the world are enjoying preferential treatment versus the united states in russia. they have better intellectual property protections. they have lower tariff barriers. they have other open market concessions, and many of them are our allies but all of them are our competitors. now, clearly parts of russia's economy is little better than a kleptocracy with human and political rights. the jackson-vanik amendment is in place today. this would repeal it. and the magnitsky bill will support human rights and political rights in russia. i share with my colleagues, charlie vanik, after he

retired, became a constituent to mine. he wrote a letter to me saying the time for the jackson-vanik bill has passed, and in fact in many areas it's counterproductive. we're doing the right thing, the right thing for america's workers and the right thing for america's economy in supporting this legislation today. thank you, madam speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan, mr. camp's, recognized. mr. camp: thank you. i yield two minutes to a distinguished member from the ways and means committee, the gentleman from new york, mr. reed. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new york is recognized for two minutes. mr. reed: thank you, madam speaker, and thank you, mr. chairman, for yielding time to me today. i rise, madam speaker, in support of the proposed legislation to repeal jackson-vanik at the present time. to me what this represents is an opportunity for american manufacturers, american farmers to have access to the russian market so that we can go about the number one priority of this congress and the next congress, getting people back to work. this represents an opportunity to increase u.s. exports potentially by double or even

tripling those export levels to this -- over the next five years with pntr status in place for russia. i strongly support the proposed legislation, and i take a point of disagreement with my good friend from oregon when he was referencing his comments in opposition to the proposed legislation. . there are after 18 years of negotiation, some of the negotiations being led by the united states in the most aggressive matter to hold them accountable to the rules of the w.t.o., they are now a member. by not supporting this legislation, we are handcuffing american manufacturers and farmers and not allowing them to take advantage of this opportunity that is there. i urge all my colleagues to support the proposed legislation and i urge us to move forward with expanding job opportunities for generations of americans to come. with that i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the

gentleman yields back. the gentleman from michigan, mr. levin. mr. levin: it's my pleasure to yield one minute to the gentleman from tennessee. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from tennessee is recognized for one minute. >> i rise in strong support of this legislation because it will mean jobs in memphis and make russia which is potentially one of our most important relationship a stronger one. mr. cohen: i also rise in magnitsky rule of law. we must hold the killers responsible as well as others who have been responsible for human rights abuses. i'm particularly concerned about an all-woman's punk rock band that stationed an unauthorized concert in a church. they were arrested and charged with hooliganism. they were sentenced, subject to a trial, that was little more than farce. they were not allowed to testify and weren't allowed testimony for witnesses on their side. they were sentenced to two years prison sentence, and the penal colony far away from their families and from moscow. i recently met with their legal team and the husband of one of

their members and i found their story troubling. they are the latest victim of russia's government's brutal crackdown on dissent and responsible for the miscarriage of justice should be held accountable. the band was prevented from exercising first amendment rights and also a fair trial. this is the sort of victims -- 15 more seconds? mr. levin: i yield 15 seconds. mr. cohen: these are the sorts of victims contemplated in this legislation. i hope the state department will give strong consideration of their case when compiling the list called for. russia should be a partner and friend but we cannot stand by with these abuses. i thank mr. levin and thank the head of the foreign affairs committee, mr. berman. i urge my colleagues to support this legislation. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from -- mr. camp: i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from michigan, mr. levin, is recognized. mr. levin: it's now my pleasure

to yield a minute to a the gentleman who has just been sworn in, a colleague of ours from michigan, mr. curson. this is your maiden speech. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan is recognized. mr. curson: today i will vote in favor of h.r. 6156, and to change russia's trading status from conditional to permanent normal trade relations. by doing so, we will ensure that american businesses, workers, and farmers will receive the same competitive access to russia's markets that all other countries receive in the w.t.o. it's my hope that h.r. 6156 would provide growth opportunities for american businesses and create jobs for our workers here at home. however while expanding trade with russia, we must not lose sight of our american values. and our commitment to human rights. h.r. 6156 has been updated and

significantly improved by the adoption of the sergei magnitsky rule of law accountability act of 2012. sergei magnitsky was a 37-year-old russian lawyer and father of two who was tortured to death after he exposed an elaborate tax fraud scheme, the largest in russian history, that defrauded the russian people of $230 million. november 16 will be the third anniversary -- the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman is recognized for 30 seconds. mr. curson: this is the third anniversary of sergei's death and to date no one has been punished for this crime of the the act will finally hold those responsible for the embezzlement of sergei's death accountable. but by denying them entry to the united states and freezing their assets. the bill will also hold accountable anyone believed to be responsible for killing, torturing, or committing other human rights violations against

anyone seeking to expose corruption or expand human rights and freedoms. the act requires the executive -- the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. mr. levin: i yield an additional 15 seconds. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan has 30 seconds remaining. 15 seconds. mr. curson: the act requires the executive branch to punish a list of people who are to be punished under its sanctions and gives key members of congress the ability to request that the names of other human rights violators be added to the list. this is critical for its success, however the state department must do its right and hold human rights violators accountable. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from michigan, mr. camp, has 10 1/2 minutes remaining. the gentleman from michigan, mr. levin, has 15 seconds. mr. camp: at this time i have no further speakers and am prepared to close. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan, mr. levin. is recognized for 15 seconds.

mr. levin: i would ask mr. camp if you yield me an additional minute and a half. mr. camp: i yield the gentleman from michigan one minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is yielded one minute. mr. levin: i wanted mr. curse -- i yield myself such time as i may consume. to finish the roots in the labor movement and beyond. we are proud to have you here and welcome your statement. as i close i want to congratulate everybody who worked on this to try to strengthen it. i also want to say just a word about jackson-vanik. because this terminates that provision that was a part of the trade bill. and i just want to salute everybody over the years who worked to implement what mr. jackson, senator jackson, and congressman vanik undertook. many of us, my late wife and myself, so many others went to

russia to try to make real that amendment. it showed that trade is more than the flow of goods. we have to look at the structure within which trade operates. so i close again by attributing so much to people who work so hard to try to make sure that those who wanted to leave russia, the jewish community, and beyond a chance to live and pursue their lives with dignity. this is an important moment. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from michigan, mr. camp, is recognized. mr. camp: thank you. i yield myself the balance of the time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. camp: i, too, want to thank mr. levin for his work on this legislation. for his long-time work on jackson-vanik. those are very different times and his leadership there, i

think, has paved the way for the effort that we are going to see today. i think a very large bipartisan vote. i appreciate the bipartisanship on this bill. i also want to thank mr. dreier who will be retiring at the end of this congress, the gentleman from california, who is chairman of the rules committee, who has been a leader on trade, on trade issues, and has really been a mentor to me on these issues since i came to congress. and his leadership will be missed both in the rules committee and his intelligent contribution to debate on the floor, as well as his leadership on trade issues. this truly is, as mr. levin said earlier, a bipartisan effort. and many brought it forward. mr. mcgovern, ms. ros-lehtinen, mr. cardin, former member of the ways and means committee now in the senate. and this is the seventh bipartisan trade bill we have had this congress. also not to be forgotten that

this also moves mole dovian -- moldova pntr. they joined the w.t.o. 11 years ago. finally we are seeing a resolution and some movement there. but as others have said, russia is and will be a member of the w.t.o., regardless of whether the united states grants russia pntr. but the commercial benefits, the jobs that will be created here in the united states, because of russia's accession are significant if we do grant pntr. and as a w.t.o. member, russia will be subject to rules and regulations that the w.t.o. creates that they are not subject to now. they must comply with all of their rules and regulations that helps level the playing field for our workers, our employers, our exporters as they -- particularly in the areas of discriminatory practices, intellectual property rights, more transparency, implementing uniform rules and customs, all the things that are needed to have a viable economic, equal --

dynamic and equal relationship are important there. also it's important to note that our employers, workers, and farmers, and ranchers and employees will not get any benefits of having russia into the w.t.o. unless we grant this. this is an important step. it will bring us big gains. as has been said this establishes tools that will help us ensure russia's enforcement. i think particularly also in the area of human rights it's important that the magnitsky legislation was -- is a part of this legislation. and i urge support for this bill and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. all time for debates 7 debate on the bill has expired. pursuant to house resolution 80 , the previous question is ordered on the bill as amended. the question is on engrossment and third reading of the bill.

those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the ayes have it. third reading. the clerk: a bill to authorize the extension of nondiscriminatory treatment, normal trade relations treatment, to products of the russian federation and moldova, and to require reports on the compliance of the russian federation with its obligations as a member of the world trade organization, and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: the question is on passage of the bill, those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the gentleman -- in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. mr. camp: i demand the yeas and nays. the speaker pro tempore: the yeas and nays are requested. those favoring a vote by the yeas and nays will rise. a sufficient number having arisen, the yeas and nays are ordered. pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20,

further proceedings on this he question will be postponed. the speaker pro tempore: the chair lays before the house the following privileged concurrent resolution. the clerk: senate concurrent resolution 60, resolved, that when the senate recesses or adjourns on any day from thursday, november 15, 2012, through friday, november 16, 2012, on a motion offered pursuant to this concurrent resolution by its majority leader or his designee, it stand recessed or adjourned until 12:00 noon on monday, november 26, 2012 or such other time on that day as may be specified by its leader -- it's majority leader or his designee and the motion to recess or adjourn, or until the time of any reassembly pursuant to section 2 of this concurrent resolution, whichever occurs first.

and that when the house adjourns on any legislative day from friday, november 16, 20 12, through friday, november 23, 2012, on a motion offered pursuant to this concurrent resolution by its majority leader or his designee, it stand adjourned until 2:00 p.m. on tuesday, november 27, 2012, or until the time of any reassembly pursuant to section 2 of this concurrent resolution, which ever occurs first. section 2, the majority leader of the senate and the speaker of the house or their respective designees acting jointly after consultation with the majority leader of the senate and the minority leader of the house shall notify the members of the senate and house respectively to reassemble at such place and time as they may designate in their opinion the public interest shall warrant it. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the concurrent resolution is agreed, and a the motion to reconsider is laid upon the table. pursuant to clause 12-a of rule

1, the chair tea clares the house in recess until approximately 11:30 today. aol oot house returning after the thanksgiving holiday on monday, november 26. also happening on capitol hill today, both the house and senate against committees are hearing from former c.i.a. director david petraeus, who is testifying closed door hearings about the attacks on the u.s. consulate in benghazi, libya. he's wrapped up his testimony

before the house neat committee and now before the senate intelligence committee. after this morning's testimony, several members came out to speak to reporters, including the chair of the house homeland security committee and intelligence committee member, party king of new york. >> basically it's still not clear how the talking points emerged. it's a long process involving many agencies. including the department of justice, state department, and no one knows yet exactly who came up with the final version of talking points other than to say the original talking points prepared by the c.i.a. were different from the ones that were finally put out. .

this was a terrorist attack. i had a different recollection of that. the impression we were given was that the overwhelming amount of evidence was that it rose out of a spontaneous demonstration and was not a terrorist attack. and pointed out the following week when matt olson said it was a terrorist attack, it made headlines. until then the administration was saying it was not terrorists. again, it was very cordial. general petraeus is an outstanding patriot. we thanked him for his service. but he has a different impression of the impression that he left on september 14. >> can you tell us whether or not his affair or the security issues surrounding his affair came up at all? >> only at one question he was asked at the start, did that

have any impact on his testimony, he said no. >> how were the talking points different? >> the original talking points were much more specific about al qaeda involvement. and the final ones said indications of extremists. it said indicate even though it was clearly evidence of the c.i.a. that there was al qaeda involvement. >> did you get any idea why they were changed? >> they just said it goes through a long process. into agency process. and when they came back it was taken out. >> did he seem concerned that things were changed? was that surprising to him? >> he said they didn't realize the full significance of that and that for an unclassified statement this was acceptable. again, it's still very vegas. >> -- vague. >> was petraeus under oath? >> no. there's no oath given. >> mr. king, did he give any -- allay any of your concerns? >> i'm satisfied with the ultimate conclusion he reached. i told him i honestly disagree with his rec olympics of what he told us on september 14.

>> what did he say about the affair? >> no commentings, not at all. >> did that make it hard to get past that? the sell ashese details that dominated the news, did that make it hard? >> no. it was made clear at the start that would not be a focus of the questioning and i would say 10 seconds into it that was off to the side. >> [inaudible] why you wanted to hear from him was since he briefed you the first and home time, he went to libya? so he obviously was giving you a bit of a trip report. is there anything you can tell us that he clearly learned from actually being on the ground? >> no. that would be classified. other than the fact that they now clearly believe it did not rise out of a demonstration, it was not spontaneous and it was clear terrorist involvement. >> he said that straight out? >> yes. >> [inaudible] >> this is ongoing. this still can be -- obviously the secretary of state, secretary of defense, and also

people at the white house, see if anyone at the white house changed the talking points. >> do you think you need to hear from him again on this and also on the -- >> we'll have to see. one day at a time. >> he still couldn't provide any explanation, though, as to why it took them so long to come to that conclusion? >> he was saying -- >> -- today, there was no explanation. >> he was saying there are many streams of intelligence but he also stated that he thought all along he made it clear that there was significant terrorist involvement. and that is not my rec lex of what he told us -- recollection of what he told us. >> how did he seem? did he seem tired or worn down from sort of the scandals that have been playinging him? >> no -- playing him? >> -- plaguing him? >> no. he was strong soldier. very knowledgeable. very strong. and again, spoke to him at the beginning of the hearing and the end of the hearing. i consider him a friend. which made the questioning tough, to be honest with you. >> how long did the testimony last?

>> you said you consider him a friend. it made the questioning tough? >> we asked questions. sometimes in a hearing your adrenaline is pumping and you're going back and forth. you realize the human tragedy here and that he's going through an awful lot. on the other hand we had an obligation to find out what we could. it's a lot easier when you disease like the guy when you're asking him questions. like when you ask us questionless. >> did he give any indication of how he felt after ambassador rice's testimony? >> he didn't watch the testimony. >> did he sleep with her before hand? >> no. >> [inaudible] the c.i.a. gave the white house included al qaeda involvement and afterwards that was taken out? >> there was a c.i.a. analyst with him that said the talking points were drafted, were specific about al qaeda affiliations or al qaeda terrorist arctivities. they didn't have in front of them. sea the said that was after it went through the process. whatever that process is which they seemed unclear about, that was taken out. >> how long did the testimony last? >> hour and a half. he spoke for about -- gave an

opening statement of about 20 minutes and so an hour and 10 minutes of questions. >> was he asked about the statement that paula broadwell made at a speech? >> no. >> about the c.i.a.? >> no. >> are you saying the d.n.i. took it out or the administration took it out? >> not the d.n.i. again, it was not -- i guess it's how you define the administration. because it also went to the department of justice, state department and i believe the national security council. >> did he talk about the films, the videos and how -- >> yes. >> and what did he say -- >> i can't get into that. nothing controversial. >> did you guys watch any films today like what they did -- >> no. yesterday. we saw them yesterday. we saw them yesterday. >> did he say why it was taken out of the talking points? >> no. >> he didn't know? >> they were not involved -- >> how did he not know? >> it was done -- the process was completed and they said -- ok, go with those talking points. again, i got the impression it involved seven, eight, nine different agencies. >> did he give any impression

that was upset that it was taken out? >> no. >> did the c.i.a. say ok to the revised reports? >> after it goes through the process they ok'd it to go. >> who did he say -- >> i don't know. >> who did he say he thinks committed the attack? >> i would just leave it at al qaeda affiliates. >> was it awkward to have him in the room a week after he resigned under the circumstances -- >> yeah, a certain amount of awkwardness, yeah, sure. obviously all of us in the room, including myself, all of us have a great regard for him. i've known him for nine years now. so i actually urged him to run for president a few years ago. i went to dinner with him, i consider him dish know him fairly well. >> was there any discussion -- >> yeah, any time you see human tragedy for a good person it's tough to go through, sure. >> was there any discussion of the national security implications of his resignation -- no.

>> the resignation, he just addressed it in the beginning. he read what happened and that was basically it. >> was he involved in the national decision making the night of the attack? >> i don't want to get into that. he was definitely fully aware of what was going on, yeah. >> did he ask for military backup? >> i can't get into any of that. >> did he tick stick to the story that the first attack was spontaneous but the second seemed to be more organized? >> i can tell you the spontaneous aspect is definitely minimized right now. it was primarily a terrorist attack. >> how about how -- let be be careful about this -- did he address how he interpreted the anti-muslim film and how that got to be part of this discussion even though he downplayed that? >> it was based on reports we were getting in at the time. >> so that was part of what was

going into this intelligence product that they were creating? and then they got other information later which said this -- >> well, yes. but also they also at the time, prior to september 14 had, clear information that this was strong involvement with al qaeda affiliates. and that was not made particulate of their presentation. -- part of their presentation. >> -- the former director was going to explain that he saw kind of two streams of intelligence. one suggesting maybeal shari'a was involved and the other that it was the protest resulting from the anti-muslim video is that the way he described it to you? >> he did but he said today that he at the time was also emphasizing the involvement of the man and he was minimizing the role of al shari'a. >> again, that's peter king of new york, after this morning's house intelligence committee hearing. a closed-door session with former c.i.a. director david

petraeus. on the benghazi attacks. general petraeus is before the senate intelligence committee at this hour. also speaking to reporters after the house meeting, the ranking member of the house intelligence committee, from maryland, dutch ruppersberger. >> what did you learn in the briefing? >> first thing, i think it was very positive that general petraeus agreed to come before our committee. i think the fact that it was good for the country, it was good for our intelligence community and it was good for general petraeus to bring closure to a lot of issues that were out there that he needed to take care of and testify before our committee. we talked about the first briefing that he gave us, where there was a dispute about what he had said and i was at that hearing and basically he reinforced the fact that initially, the first 24 hours, he felt at that point or the c.i.a. felt at that point that this was a protest as a result

half happened with the film in egypt. he clarified that after more information came in, it was not a protest, but he also did clarify, which is very important and relevant, because this has been a debate for a long period of time, that he made in this statement to us that there were extremists in the group and that they are al qaeda affiliates. some were al qaeda affiliates. and that's very important because that's been a debate for the last three or four weeks. >> congressman king was just here saying his recollection is that yeah, maybe the then director talked about extremist elements but he downplayed it big time. he talked a lot more -- the emphasis at that time -- >> it's all about your perception and the information that you receive. when i was there and chairman rogers was not, he was at another function, my recollection is that we thought it was as a result of a protest and that was the gipping. so the first thing you hear is

maybe what you retain. but he also said that in the group there were extremists and some al qaeda affiliates and that was said in the very beginning. whether it is or it isn't now, the fact is that he clarified it and it goes to show that when you try to get information out very quickly, because of the congress will need to hear about it, thed a sfration and media, that the -- the administration, and media, that the information with respect to intelligence changes. as soon as they received additional information they clarified it. >> within the first 24 hours did the c.i.a. believe this was a terrorist attack? >> yes. clearly that was said at all times. because of the people involved in the group were affiliates of al qaeda and other extremist groups. >> so if that was the description, that it was a terrorist attack within the first 24 hours, was that information communicated and doesn't that contradict the idea of spontaneous demonstration? >> i think if you look at the

facts, and what we learned yesterday as far as -- as the film is concerned, the first incident was a lot different than the second incident and the annex. that is the difference. when you look and see what was there, you had individuals coming into the compound who were looting. there was no command and control, evaluating where we're going to go, how we're going to go. but there also were people that were attacking and putting buildings on fire. but the second incident, that was entirely different. that was well organized, seemed to be command and control, and people who had experience in attacking and are al qaeda and our extremists knew what they were doing. they knew how to shoot mortars and hit targets. so there were two different types of situations. the first and the second. and that's probably where the opportunistic issue comes to play. once they had the ability to attack the first, they got real organized and the annex was a lot more serious and well controlled by the terrorists.

>> was this an intelligence failure? >> i think it wasn't -- intelligence failure is getting information as it comes. and you -- and the initial situation, this is what they understood. but then the investigation evolved. and the fact that you could then start to interview the people on the ground, which is very relevant and important, also getting the tape, very relevant and important. and remember, we had to get our americans out of there. that was a very serious situation. there's a lot of concern about the fact that the f.b.i. didn't come back for three weeks. the reason is when they had to go back they needed protection. they needed to make sure that their lives were not at risk again. and we had to rely in the beginning with a very unorganized government and security group who was working with us and that was the libyans themselves. >> can you explain rice's comments five days later? why that was still the line of spontaneous -- >> we talked some about susan rice. susan rice got a lot of the same information that we did. i'll make a comparison to colin

powell. when colin powell went before the united nations, getting information from the administration on the facts. >> you said that within 24 hours -- [inaudible] this was five days later. >> i said they knew right away that there were terrorists involved in the operation. >> why wasn't that part -- >> wait, are you finished? what? give it to me. >> in other words, if he knew within 24 hours it was terrorist-related, how come five days later in the talking points for susan rice it still was saying it's a spontaneous demonstration? >> i assume dish didn't talk to susan rice, i assume she received information and he was not a part of briefing susan rice. information coming together with a different agencies that were involved and had jurisdiction, giving information to susan rice or anyone else, including our committee. >> i was following that. you answered the question. >> he was the head of the c.i.a. >> he was the head of the

c.i.a. who put together the information. he personally -- personally didn't brief susan rice. >> but he received all the information they gets, right? doesn't he oversee all the -- >> part of the team of the c.i.a. which he's in charge, yes. but let's get clarity here. the bottom line is that this -- the initial information that we got is what susan rice got, what did it say? basically it said in the beginning they thought it was an event as a result of a film and what happened in egypt. later on they found that wasn't the case. changed the situation and said that was not the case. and then the other issue as far as susan rice is concerned is -- she went before -- with the administration, she made comments, but i don't know how much further i can go with susan rice. i didn't talk to susan riot rice. all i know is what she said and she received a lot of the same information that we did. >> we were told -- >> the briefing on september 14, was that to the whole

committee and was that petraeus briefing the committee? >> the -- petraeus briefing the committee. >> and having another briefing here today -- >> yes, we're having the ranking members who are involved in jurisdiction somewhere or other. whether it's the state department or -- i assume homeland security. i really am getting ready to go there now so i'll tell you who is there. >> you sound like you're very satisfied. you seem satisfied with what general petraeus told you today. did he allay all your concerns? >> i think he stated exactly what he said to clarify what he said the in the first hearing and, yes, he did. i think the fact that he was the head of the c.i.a., even though we have a lot of respect for mike, that he was at that time head of the c.i.a. we also talked to, about his trip to libya. and to talk to people on the ground which is also important and relevant. our role in the intelligence committee is to follow the facts. get away from the emotion, get away from the media hype and bottom line, determine what the facts are. and question him under oath to make sure that occurred. both republicans and democrats. that's what we did today.

>> when you get intelligence, you get intelligence, you collect it, you give it over to analysts. analysts review it and send it out. it kept evolving over the progress. >> the talking points congressman king told us the talking points initially had al qaeda in them. that you were received before september 16. but then those were taken out. >> they got changed in the reference to al qaeda got stripped out by state d.o.j. and other people who got a look at the talking points. >> i'm not aware that they were knocked out at that point, the talking points. i'm the one that asked for the talking points because i thought it was important that we didn't give out classified information. >> congressman, were questions posted to general petraeus about the scandal? >> there was a mention about that and his comments basically were, he was very sorry that this incident occurred and anything that occurred with respect to his personal

situation had nothing to do with his -- the way he handled benghazi at all and he also clarified this because this was out there too. his resignation was because he didn't want to testify. clearly that was not the case. end of story. >> did he say that there was no national security issues with regard to the scandal? >> we didn't get into that. we didn't get into that. >> one last question. was the condition of him coming to the briefing that he did not be out in public? the media hasn't seen him at all. was that a condition? >> i didn't talk to him about his conditions of the briefing. >> why would you provide security for a private citizen? security of this nature? >> did he have security? >> everywhere. >> ok. that's an administration issue. you have to talk to them about that. >> i guess the question is, were you trying to protect him? not just you but the whole committee trying to protect him so that we wouldn't be able to get a shot of him, we wouldn't be able to see him? was that part of the deal? >> i came in at 7:10 and i

talked to him for five minutes before the hearing. that's all i know. i didn't have any conversation about the fact he came out. i said, it's important for closure, it's good -- it's important for the country, for our committee. you were head of the f.b.i., not the f.b.i., the c.i.a., at the time of benghazi. this has become a political issue and a very hotly contested campaign. let's get to the facts now. and you're the only one that can really do this. let's bring closure to the situation and i thank him for his service and that was it. >> you don't know of any special arrangements made for his detail? >> no. >> did he say whether -- how he felt about the change that was made in the assessment that king says was that the al qaeda mention was taken out? >> i have to look at that, whether it was taken out. i'm not sure what that issue is and i have to review that. i think the important thing is what he said and we all know that facts change. when you get more information. and when you try to come out very quickly with an assessment

to let your bosses know, which would be the administration, let congress know, and also to the public, you know, through the media, a lot of information can change. and that is what occurred here. we want to get it right. and intelligence is an evolving process. you've got to get on the ground. there were people that were injured in the incident who were interviewed late northern germany. that was more information. i think the most important thing was the realtime information that we got yesterday, seeing the film on the first attack. i think that was very important. that clarified a lot of issues there. >> was he -- [inaudible] ? >> we have a court reporter but you're not supposed to lie towls. as a former prosecutor we can probably make a criminal case if he lied. i don't know who's here. i assume he will be. i assume it's the same group that came in yesterday. >> these are just follow-up questions you're asking about benghazi? >> this is for people other than our committee, ranking members who had to deal with

this, who have some type of clearsance, that are going -- democrats and republicans are going to have the same briefing we had yesterday. i don't think they're going to show them the film. i'm not sure they're cleared for sources of evidence. >> [inaudible] >> we're leaving afghanistan. we still have to have some presence to protect our interests and our national security. so we will have an intelligence component and probably some type of special operations. general petraeus is one of the few people in our country who had the military experience and we know how brilliant he was there. but also had the fedges experience. and -- intelligence experience. and those two combinations made him very important and very relevant and qualified. so i would hope that there'd be an opportunity to have him give his advice in certain situations as it relates to what i just said. >> when you say the information kept evolve, do you know now when they definitely knew it was a terrorist attack? >> i think from the very

beginning they felt that there were people who were there, that were affiliated with al qaeda. we know, remember, that that was a very hostile area. that when he a lot of al qaeda and people from other countries coming in, a lot of extremists and radicals who were in that area and that was of concern to us and that's why initially the intelligence community said information this is a hot spot, that we have to be on high alert. they didn't not predict the fact that an actual attack was going to occur that. didn't happen. ultimately it did. anything else? i got to go back. >> did you say you asked him -- or you said that he said his resignation had nothing to do with ben gazzy. i know you were going to ask him that. >> i'm not sure if i asked him the question. i asked him four or five questions. basically he made the statement, it's not what i asked him. someone asked him. or maybe he just volunteered this at the beginning, i'm not sure. that basically his resignation

had nothing to do with the benghazi issue or that he resigned so he would not have to testify. that's clarified. i don't think there's any dispute with respect to that issue. take care. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012] >> that's dutch ruppersberger, the ranking democrat on the house intelligence committee. again, david petraeus testifying on capitol hill before both the house and senate intelligence committees, behind closed doors. and it may be that the senate intelligence committee is wrapping up. it was tweeted that senator conrad says after the petraeus intelligence briefing, it is very clear susan rice used the talking points signed off on by the c.i.a. also in washington today, president obama at the white house hosting the first formal discussion between the president and congressional leaders on solutions to the so-called fiscal cliff, the pending tax increases and budget cuts, january 1, if congress doesn't act.

the meeting got under way at the white house just about an hour ago or so. and the president started it with some comments to reporters. >> i want to welcome the congressional leadership here and thank them for their time. i think we're all aware that we have some urgent business to do. we've got to make sure that taxes don't go up on middle class families, that our economy remains strong, that we're creating jobs and that's an agenda that democrats and republicans and independents, people all across the country, share. so our challenge is to make sure that we are able to cooperate together, work together, find some common ground, make some tough compromises, build some consensus to do the people's business. and what the folks are looking for, i think all of us agree on

this, is action. they want to see that we are focused on them, not focused on our politics here in so, my hope is that this is going to be the beginning of a fruitful process where we're able to come to an agreement. we'll reduce our deficit in a balanced way, that we will deal with some of these long-term impediments to growth and we're also going to be focusing on making sure that no -- middle class families are able to get ahead. so i want to thank all the leadership for coming and with that we're going to get to work. thank you very much. appreciate it. oh, wait, wait. excuse me. there's actually one other point that i want to make. and that is that my understanding is tomorrow's somebody's birthday. so those of you who want to wish him a happy birthday, we're not going to embarrass him with a cake because we didn't know how many candles

were needed. but -- >> yeah right. >> but we do want to wish him a happy birthday. >> thank you, thank you. >> thank you, everybody. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012] >> that video from the white house within the last hour or so, so it's possible that members are still there. we can tell that you we have cameras at the white house and we will be bringing you any reaction if there is reaction from members of the house and senate. the house is due back in just a little bit, about 11:30 eastern or so, for one vote, and that is on the russia trade bill. they've already greed to the adjournment resolution so that means we won't see the house in next week for pro formas. once they finish up today they won't be back until monday the 26th. but still on the agenda, the one last item to do is a vote on final passage on the russia trade bill and we get some background from a capitol hill reporter.

supporters of this bill, normalizing trade relations with russia, are saying it's long overdue and good for the nation's economy. why is that? >> well, it will certainly hopefully double exports to russia from the united states and it will probably go across a broad base group of products. manufacturers are backing it very strongly and have said that it could be airplanes and all the parts associated with that, including locomotives, chemicals, food, clothing, it seems that russia definitely likes u.s. products. so they just expect there to be a pretty good and relatively quick growth of exports from the u.s. to russia. >> then who's lining up to oppose the bill and what are their arguments against it? >> well, i really haven't seen much in opposition. it seems like it's got wide bipartisan support on capitol hill. it's got business groups, manufacturers, even the administration backs this bill.

so it does seem to have pretty broad support across washington and across the country for businesses that want to export their products to russia. >> with all the legislation that remains to be done in the lame duck session, this is the first one that gets teed up. what are the bill's prospects in the senate? >> well, the bill's prospects look pretty good. they're going to be a couple of issues they're going to work out. the house has attached a human rights bill that is very narrowly focused on violations in russia. it's called the magnitsky legislation. now, the senate has also a similar legislation but it's broader. it would deal with human rights violations worldwide. that is sponsored by senator ben carden. so there's talk now that when the bill goes to the senate, the senate might decide that it's going to add a -- add language that makes the bill apply to global human rights

violations. but in just talking to senator carden recently, he said he's still really not sure how that's all going to pan out. but he definitely wants this bill done by the end of this session, which obviously would be sometime before christmas. >> given that the agreement on the human rights piece of this bill, what does the administration say? what bill will they sign? when the president finally sees it? >> well, it sounds like that most of the time the administration has been against any human rights legislation being attached. there's been some concern that there would be some backlash from russia on it. but generally, even as business groups have said, that russia must follow the rules of the world trade organization. so i think that the administration will probably accept this bill. they did say they certainly back the provisions to normalize trade relations and it seems like they might just have to sign a measure that indeed includes those human rights -- that human rights legislation because it has such

wide and broad backing from congress. >> and lastly, does russian president vladimir putin support this legislation? >> i think he duff definitely wants the u.s. to have normal trade relations with the united states. they definitely want to get that trading line on track and sort of get past some of this cold war era, you know, rules that were put on russia in 1974. i haven't heard him say too much -- >> and back live now to the house floor for final vote on that bill. title of the bill. the clerk: union calendar number 454, h.r. of 156, a bill to authorize the extension of nondiscriminatory treatment, normal trade relations treatment to products of the russian federation and moldova and require reports on the compliance of the russian federation with its obligations as a member of the world trade organization, and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: the question is on passage of the bill. members will record their votes by electronic device.

this will be a 15-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]

the speaker pro tempore: on this vote the yeas are 365, the nays are 43. the bill is passed and without objection a motion to reconsider is laid on the table.

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from indiana rise? mr. burton: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent that the committee on foreign affairs be discharged from further consideration of h.res. 813 and ask for its immediate consideration in the house. the speaker pro tempore: i would ask the members to take their conversations off the floor. so we can continue with the work of the house. the clerk will report the title of the resolution. the clerk: house resolution 813, resolution expressing vigorous support and unwavering

commitment to the welfare, security and survival of the state of israel as a jewish and democratic state with secure borders and recognizing and strongly supporting its right to act in self-defense to protect its citizens against acts of terrorism. the speaker pro tempore: is there objection to the consideration of the resolution? without objection, the resolution is agreed to and the motion to reconsider is laid on the table. the chair will entertain requests for one-minute speeches. for what purpose does the gentlelady from tennessee rise? mrs. black: thank you, mr.

speaker. last year u.s. exports to russia exceeded $11 billion. and in my home state of tennessee, companies such as international paper, cummings and dupont exported nearly $162 million in goods and services to russia. last year. we need to continue to build on our strong trade relations and passing h.r. 6156, which will permanently normalize trade relations with russia, will do just that. by joining the rest of the members of the world trade organization we will put america on a level playing field with those already reaping the benefit from russia's accession to the w.t.o. last august. this will enable american companies to wherever from double to triple their number of exports which in turn will stimulate economic growth and job creation in america. i applaud the house for passing h.r. 6156, a commonsense jobs

bill that won't cost taxpayers a dime. and i urge the senate to follow our lead and pass this important legislation without delay. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentlelady from florida rise? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute, revise and extend my remarks. was was thank you, mr. speaker -- ms. wasserman schultz: thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, i rise today in defense of our ally israel and her sovereign right to self-defense. as we all know, -- mr. speaker, the house is not in order. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is correct. the house is not in order. i'd ask the members to take their conversations off the floor. you may start over. ms. wasserman schultz: thank you. mr. speaker, thank you. i rise today in defense of our

ally israel and her sovereign right to self-defense. as we all know, israel lives in a difficult neighborhood of instability, violence and uncertainty. in the towns of israel's southern border, families have become unacceptably accustomed to running for shelter to avoid rocket attacks from the gaza strip. but nothing could provide preparation for justification for the onslaught of missile fire raining down on israeli towns and cities over the past few months, nor the escalated barrage of the last few dales. since the beginning of 2012, hamas has launched more than 900 rockets at the state of israel. 340 of these were in the past several days alone. in the face of this brutality, israel, like any nation, has the right and the duty to protect her citizens from unwarranted violence and destruction. two days ago israel launched operation pillar of defense, a legal proportion ath surgical strike aimed exclusively at hamas' missile pige pile and terrorist leadership. we watch with deep concern as these events continue town fold and we remain united in our support of israel's sovereign

right to self-defense. i am proud that the iron dome missile defense system has provided a bullwater of support during this time. we mourn the loss of life and send our deepest condolences to families of victims. we reject what ma'am's call to violence and remain hopeful for a return to common peace. thank you, i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from minnesota -- mr. paulsen: mr. speaker, i rise today to commend a minnesota service organization that has for 24 years -- 25 years fought against childhood malnutrition in err corner. globe. since its acception, feed my starving children has tirelessly worked to provide life-saving meals for millions of children, shipping an astounding 600 million meals to individuals to nearly 70 chris around the world and here in the united states.

the true effect of the work they do for severely malnutritioned children is immeasurable. several times i have volunteered personally with my staff and packed meals which saved my starving children sends to malnutrition children in places like haiti and sudan. but we're not alone. as nearly 670,000 volunteers have joined in fulfilling their vital mission. feed my starving children's commitment to fighting children hunger for the past quarter century has been steadfast and is positively impacted the lives of millions in minnesota and around the world. i'd like to commend all those involved in feed my starving children for their hard work and look forward to another successful 25 years and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from ohio rise? mr. kucinich: i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: granted. mr. kucinich: members of congress, as congress goes into the thanksgiving holiday we're going to be deliberating what

we can do to help our nation avoid its perilous financial condition we're headed toward. i have a suggestion that is just in a small way to make a contribution and saving billions of dollars. everyone here knows the problem we have with childhood obesity in america. childhood obesity is at an epidemic level. we all know young people who have consumed various types of food that have left them in a condition that is unhealthy and yet did you know that we're actually giving tax deductions out to big companies that go ahead and advertise and market products that contribute to childhood obesity? so what i'm doing is introducing a bill right now that would protect children's health by denying any deduction for advertising and marketing that's directed at children to promote the consumption of food at fast food restaurants or of any kind of food of poor nutritional quality. in this way, when -- if this bill becomes law, if it's adopted in the negotiations to

try to avoid a fiscal cliff, we can find a way not only to reduce childhood obesity by blocking these deductions for the advertising, but we can also enable our children's health to be put on a better path and our country's health to be put on a better path. thank you. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from maryland rise? without objection. mr. hoyer: i thank the speaker. mr. speaker, i join my colleagues today from both sides of the aisle to stand with the people of israel in support of their sovereign right to defend themselves against hamas terror. over the past year alone hamas has launched approximately 900 rockets and artillery shells from gaza into israel's civilian neighborhoods. my colleagues, think for just a

minute whether or not rockets were coming from mexico or from canada, we would not stand for it for one minute. this week we saw them fire what mass -- fire rockets as far northern as tel aviv and today we have disturbing reports that at least one rocket hit near jerusalem. the seat of israel's government and a city holy to jews, muslims and christians alike. that hamas would specially target israel's parliament building as reports indicate shows the great disregard hamas has for the very idea of democracy which does not exist in gaza. by strengthening united states' relationship with israel this congress will send a powerful message to hamas and all in the region who would cause israel harm.

the right of self-defense cannot be allowed to go unexercised by a government dedicated to the protection of its people. we will stand with israel and we will also, mr. speaker,, and i thank you for the time, lament the loss of life of palestinians. every life is important. so it is not that we stand unsensitive or insensitive to the lives of palestinians. but they need to stop the violence and the attacks. israel has the right to defend itself and we will stand with them. and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from florida rise? without objection. >> mr. speaker, it is with great sadness that i take to the floor of the house of representatives today to inform my colleagues and the entire

capitol hill family of staff of the passing of my dear friend and chief of staff steve vermilion. for nearly 25 years i have known steve as a friend, family man and committed public servant. my service in congress has been greatly enhanced by steve's invaluable advice and knowledge regarding all aspects of the legislative process. as a 17-year veteran of capitol hill, steve will be dealer missed by the capitol family for his warmth and his sense of service to this institution and our nation. steve began his service in the house of representatives in 1986, serving as communications director for then congressman bob livingston. he subsequently served as a legislative snippet for congressman james sensenbrenner, as chief of staff to former congressman lincoln diaz-balart, and my chief of staff. an avid and champion rover who, steve was recognized for his work throughout his years in congress with such distinction as the congressional staff leadership award and the congress allege hispanic leadership institute. steve demonstrated his

commitment to service with great dignity these past two years as he simultaneously battled health problems while dutifully fulfilling his professional obligations with excellence and distunks -- distinction. his family can take great pride in the manner in which steve honored us all with his unwavering strength of character, his dedication to the work of the american people and his civic virtue. his wife, jennifer, his daughter, sara, his son, joe, and his entire family should know that steve made great contributions to the united states congress and to our nation. steve was indeed a man of the house. those who worked and served with him over the years are blessed to have had the opportunity to share in his life. a life that has left a lasting impact on so many. today our country has indeed lost a great american, a great patriot, a great friend, a great husband and a great father. so while we here in the united states congress bid farewell to our friend and colleague we do so always remembering the enduring spirit and sense of service that steve imparted on every life that he touched.

steve vir mill on's life served as an inspiration to all of us who knew and loved him. may god receive him mercifully into his glory and bless the family, the nation, everyone that he leaves behind. stevo, we'll miss you, big man. thank you, mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from wisconsin rise? mr. sensenbrenner: i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. sensenbrenner: mr. speaker, i rise today to join the gentleman from florida, mr. rivera, in mourning the passing of steve very millian. i gave steve vermillian his first jobs on compill, and taught him about -- compill and taught him about the legislative process -- capital hill and taught him about the legislative process. he was a man of deep integrity and a man deep to his principles and love of this

country and the democracy that we have built and nurtured over the last 230-plus years. his service to other members of congress as well as in the private sector was marked by making a difference. no one who worked with steve vermillian or was touched by his life came away a poorer person from it. he enriched all of our lives. he made a great contribution, and i join with the gentleman from florida in expressing our sympathies to his wife, jennifer, and to his two children, on his passage. may his soul rest in peace. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: are there further requests for one-minute speeches? without objection, the gentlelady from california. ms. lee: thank you, mr. speaker. as we gather here for the first

time since the election, it's important that we continue to talk about and work to resolve the questions that cannot wait really until the 113th congress. president obama, he will soon be meeting with his military advisors and considering various plans for afghanistan. my republican colleague, congressman walter jones, and i will be sending a letter to the president renewing our calls for an accelerated withdraw from afghanistan. i encourage all members to join us on this letter. keeping our troops in afghanistan through 2014 will not bring about a meaningful difference on the ground. mr. speaker, it's really time that we catch up with the american people who are calling for an accelerated end to the war in afghanistan. let's bring our troops home, end the war in afghanistan and invest in jobs and nation building here. thank you and i yield the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: are there further requests for one-minute speeches?

the chair lays before the house the following personal requests. the clerk: leaves of absence requested for mr. fitzpatrick of pennsylvania for today and ms. jackson lee of texas for today. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the personal requests are granted. under the speaker's announced policy of january 5, 2011, the gentleman from connecticut, mr. courtney, is recognized for 60 minutes as the designee of the minority leader. mr. courtney: thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, as is obvious in this room, the business for the week has now concluded. this is a week which commenced on tuesday, and prior to that the congress -- the house had not been in session for seven weeks. despite the fact that this country has a to-do list a mile

long in terms of critical issues that affect our health care system, whether it's doctors' fees that are going to hit a cliff january 1, a 37% cut for medicare providers of all stripes, particularly in the physician community. we have the fiscal cliff where tax rates are going to go up for almost every american, wage earner, if congress fails to act. we have sequestration which is a measure which will be the equivalent of a chainsaw going through the government cutting .2% from every budget, whether it's defense, nondefense issues. we have a farm bill which needs to be acted upon. we have, again, the 2008 farm bill which is a five-year measure that's expired and it's critical for rural america that we need to renew the farm bill and to give one small example, which the dairy industry has reminded people that the price

of a gallon of milk started in january could potentially go as high as $7 billion if we don't, again, restore and re-authorize the system of price supports that we have in our dairy industry. the violence against women act expires. again, a critical measure so that law enforcement officials all across the country can continue the progress that we're making in terms of the issue of domestic violence and violence against children. again, the list goes on and on. and incredibly, despite the fact that we have been out of town for seven weeks, this house convened on tuesday, is recessing again today for another week's break, and thanksgiving is obviously an important national holiday for our country and certainly something my family, like every other member's family, it's important to them. but the fact of the matter is if you look at the number of legislative days between right now and christmas where, again, congress has never been in session beyond that date, there

are literally only 17 potential days. and the speaker's office has only scheduled 12. this is not the way to run a government, and i will just say as someone who again was grateful about the support i received from my congressional district in eastern connecticut on election day a few days ago, the message i heard loud and clear is it's time for this body to knock it off, to start working together and to try and start getting some of these critical measures dealt with so that the u.s. economy can have a horizon so that employers can make investment decisions, so that employers can make hiring decisions, so that issues of tax policy and budget can give, again, sectors all across the u.s. economy the confidence to move forward. we have a very fragile recovery that we're going through right now. we're roughly averaging 100,000 to 200,000 jobs a month, which is not enough to really get a real dent in the unemployment

rate in this country. and part of the reason, i believe, and i think frankly many economists and observers of the u.s. economy today believe that we have not gotten faster recovery is because of the uncertainty that surrounds the failure of congress to act in terms of the fiscal cliff and sequestration. again, going back to the farm bill as one example of a huge sector of america's economy are agriculture, the senate passed a farm bill, a bipartisan farm bill on june 19. this is a measure that was again a five-year authorization bill that sets food policy, food security policy, food safety policy. republicans and democrats in the senate, which is again one of the most difficult legislative bodies in the world, actually came together and passed a farm bill. it will reduce the federal deficit by $23 billion, reforms the whole system of commodities

support so we are not going to be against any cash payment for farmers or in favor of a risk insurance so producers have a little more skin in the game which is a more healthy thing and market-driven approach for having a system in agriculture. in the area of dairy, which is unlike every other commodity, is harvested every day, actually two or three times a day in terms of the herds of cows that dairy farmers are working hard every day against a very challenging market and environment. we have a solid reform in the farm bill in terms of setting up a risk insurance plan for the first time in american history. have full support from the dairy industry and dairy providers. lots of compromise and negotiation. again, a $23 billion reduction to the deficit in terms of last -- the last farm bill. that was done on june 19. since then the house leadership

has refused to bring a farm bill to the floor despite the fact that the house agriculture committee, which i sit on, actually passed a bipartisan measure, so it was teed up and ready for action here on the house floor. and yet we have gone five months since the senate acted. we have seven weeks of recess prior to this past tuesday. we have american farmers who are sitting out there trying to figure out what on earth is going to be the future in terms of their production and their businesses. and as i said, if you look at the one example of milk, without having a farm bill in place on january 1, we are going to see basically the price of milk spin out of control and all the other sort of ripple effect it will have on cheese products, dairy -- dry dairy products, export products. this is not the way to treat, in my opinion, some of the hardest working people in america who, by the way, have actually been one of the brightest spots in terms of our

economy in economic growth since 2009. again, rather than leaving today, what we ought to be doing is taking the senate bill, which is a bipartisan bill, putting it on the floor, doing our job. work at least partially as hard as the dairy farmers and other farmers across america who don't have a luxury in calling a recess in terms of their operations and get this done. just having that one measure would in my opinion give us some momentum to trying to start move -- moving forward on the larger issue of the fiscal cliff. now, the senate has also passed a measure regarding the bush tax cuts. the senate passed a bill with, again, the difficulty, all the difficulty of the senate rules, which would extend the bush tax cuts for all income earned up to $250,000 which covers 98% of tax filers in america. it would allow the clinton era tax rates to avert for income

above that level, for income above $250,000. thatldferal cit by over the next 10 years. that's from the congressional budget office. that's not partisan talking points. that's actual real nonpartisan data from the congressional budget office. that is sitting waiting for the house to take up. if it was passed, president obama has indicated he would sign it within minutes. and that would basically defuse sequestration, which is that chainsaw that's sitting out there if you don't get $1.2 trillion in deficit reduction in place by january 1, sectors and programs -- critical programs, whether it's fema, whether it's the department of defense, will no longer be subject to that cut, that cutting process which is going to go into effect on january 1. i am proud to represent eastern connecticut, home of the navy base in connecticut, submarine

base that's been in effect for over 100 years. we have sailors who are doing incredible work in operating the most sophisticated equipment and platforms the world has ever seen in terms of nuclear submarines. we have a ship yard, electric ke upon nuary 1 if we been a don't deal with sequestration. but it's not only defense, which is subject to the sequestration provision of the budget control act that was passed in august of last year, the preceding year. it's also nondefense that will be subject to cuts in sequestration. one that is quite relevant to the northeast is the federal emergency management agency, fema, which is the agency that america always looks to at times of natural disasters and catastrophes. again, approximately two weeks ago the state of connecticut, along with new york, new jersey and other parts of our country was struck by one of the largest hurricanes in the history of recorded weather. the size of hurricane sandy was

1,000 miles wide. when it hit long island sound, where my district is, wind speeds gusted in some instances to over 100 miles an hour at exactly the same time that high tide was hitting communities like stonington, connecticut, east line, connecticut, new london, madison. but all the way down the coastline to new jersey. the calculation of damages from that storm, which no one could really insure for, because an event like that has almost never been recorded, is going to be in the tens of billions of dollars. it may rival katrina in terms of the need for recovery and infrastructure replacement as a result of that storm. fema has $12 billion in its account. if sequestration were to go through, the white house estimates that fema would lose about $878 million. at a time when fema emergency centers are being set up from

rhode island all the way down to southern new jersey, these are centers where people who have lost their homes in some instances, lost their businesses, have lost equipment are now flooding into to try to get relief and help like any other natural disaster in the past. these are people who paid their taxes year in and year out and made sure that fema was there when the folks down in louisiana and mississippi were hit by katrina. fema is the agency which helps communities pay for police overtime, fire overtime, sanitation worker overtime. these are the folks that we always call on at times of emergency. yet sequestration, which this congress has failed to address, is now sitting out there really putting at risk the ability of fema to do its critical job. other programs which are now subject to sequestration is the medicare program. medicare program, which serves our population of seniors over age 65, people on disability, again, would lose $4 billion

under sequestration. again, an acrossed board d chain -- an across-the-board chainsaw that would go through providers of every stripe. he education, k through 12, higher education, pell grants, staff or student loans, all subject to sequestration, a cut of 20%, according to the congressional budget office, if this body does not act. rental assistance for the poor would fall by $2.3 billion. nutrition programs for women, the w.i.c. program, would lose $543 million. the border patrol's budget would fall by $823 million. does anybody think that's a good idea? the budget for the border fence would drop by $33 million. n.i.h., which is doing critical research for cancer, cures to cancer, and genome research, is showing incredibly promising results that really i think gives a lot of those folks over there hope that we're going to be able to really eradicate or at least treat cancer as we've

never done before, again, n.i.h., national science foundation, all of these programs would be subject to equest ration if we don't act -- sequestration if we don't act by january 31. now, again, there is clearly sitting out there opportunities for us to avoid that from happening. i mentioned the farm bill, which would put a denlt in the deficit target that the sequestration law requires us to hit. the tax measure, which has already passed the senate, which would put a huge dent in hitting that target. and a recognition which both mitt romney, when he was running for president, and president obama during their last debate acknowledged, that the need for us to be funding the war in afghanistan at the rate of $100 billion a year, which is roughly what is the price tag of that measure, if you can actually put those pieces together, we can avoid having sequestration take effect. we can make sure that fema is able to do its job without worrying about whether or not

the rug is going to be pulled out from them on january 1. we can make sure that defense workers, wlts a ship yard in graten or san diego are going to be able to continue to do their work after january 1. we're going to make sure that hospitals and doctors who would be subject to these cuts are not going to basically wake up on january 2 realizing that they lose money every time they treat their patients. this is not rocket science. the pieces, even that overlap on a bipartisan basis to solve the sequestration problem are sitting out there. this is not rocket science, to say that the senate, which passed a bipartisan farm bill, can be acted upon in this body so that farmers in rural america can have a horizon ahead of them so that they can continue to do their hard work, to make sure that america's food supply stays secure and safe. what's missing is the political will to get this done. and as i mentioned at the outset, we have very little

time to get this done, if you look at the calendar in terms of how many legislative days are possible between now and january 1. again, mr. speaker, there obviously are a lot of pound digits that are spending a lot of time trying to decipher the results of the election on november 6. but i think, you know, every person in america knows in their heart and in their soul that what was really -- what the people of this country are looking for is to have a government which functions, to have a government which does its job, a government which is willing to spend the time and not keep going until recess when so many critical measures have to be acted upon, to make sure that this country again continues the path of recovery and growth and that our citizens are safe and secure. that's what people are looking for on november 6 and i think any republican and any democrat and as somebody who grew up in a proud republican family and ended up as a democrat, i feel

like i have some ability to talk like this. i mean, the fact of the matter is that that's what this country is looking for. they're looking for people to work and particularly to work together to try and solve these problems. we can do this. unfortunately we're not going back here until the monday after thanksgiving. but hopefully folks who are listening here this afternoon are going to take the time to contact their congressman, to say, it's time to knock it off, it's time to get the work done, it's time to stop this part-time schedule that makes it impossible for people to sit down and work together and work out the issues that must get worked out between now and january 1. and allow this country's recovery to move forward. if we just get that uncertainty, that cloud of uncertainty moved out of the way, the fact of the matter is the american people can do the rest of the job easily in terms of making sure that our future is going to continue to be as

bright as i think the wonderful people that make up this country give us that opportunity and that blessing. and with that, mr. speaker, i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: under the speaker's announced policy of january 5, 2011, the gentleman from texas, mr. gohmert, is recognized for 60 minutes as the designee of the majority leader. mr. gohmert: thank you, mr. speaker. there are so many problems in the world, there's so many

problems here in america, there's so many things that are being hidden, kept secret, that need to have sunlight hit them and come to be known as sunlight truly is, an illumination of not only facts but creates cleanliness when shining light comes upon things that have been hidden. we have so many things yet to resolve so, many people that are now in poverty that have not been in the past. the economy that's in trouble, a congress that can't seem to find its way, to reduce spending, so we keep digging deeper and deeper holeless.

with all the problems in this nation, we are the most blessed nation in the history of man kind. solomon's israel did not have the liberties for the individuals that we have. it didn't have the assets that we have. it didn't have obesity as a major health problem for the nation's poor. as we do. we are so richly blessed. so amidst all the skirmishing, debating, fussing, arguing, this is the last session, we are about to go out of session, for the last few moments before we hit thanksgiving.

it's a time when people should pause and understand without dwelling on our problems that we are so richly blessed. it's time, as the founders and as those leaders throughout our great history have every year paused to thank god for the blessings with which we have. some people see us fussing and debating and getting angry at times. we have such different views of the way to fix things. i see my friend, eliot engel, we don't vote on a lot of things the same way, but i know his heart and i know he's a great, honorable man.

i don't agree with ed marquee very often. in fact, -- markeey -- markey very often. he and i think we can reach some agreements on some issues regarding natural gas. louise slaughter. she didn't let a bunch of my amendments through when she was rules chair but i like her very much and she is a friend. caroline maloney, she thinks we should eliminate those private guns and i believe the second amendment should be enforced. but she's a friend. having friends in a body in which we disagree over things in the best way forward is another one of those blessings. so before we recess for thanksgiving, it is such an honor to get to remind people,

you know, we have so many people who have blessed our nation who were not born here, that are people like the president, who was born in hawaii, but was not educated for his early years, is not aware of so much of the history that many of us grew up being taught. so it's a real honor for me to get to share some of our history as we approach the thanksgiving holiday. for example, james madison was given credit for having mo more to do with our constitution than any of the others of the founders. when he was president, march 4, 1815, he had this proclamation. a guy that should know what the constitution means and that it was never intended to prevent a people from prayer and thanking god for our blessings, either

in a governmental setting or a nongovernmental setting. it was never meant to force people to pray but never intended to prevent government leaders from leading prayers. this was james madison, march 4, 1815. he said, no people ought to feel greater obligation to celebrate the goodness of the great disposer of events and of the destiny of nations than the people of the united states. to the same divine author of every good and perfect gift, we are indebted for all those privileges and advantages. religious as well as civil, which are so richly enjoyed in this land. i now recommend a day on which the people of every religious denomination may in their solemn assemblies unite their

hearts and their voices in a free will offering to their heavily benefactor of their homage of thanksgiving and of their songs of praise. abraham lincoln, in the midst of the worst war in american history, more americans died in the civil war than in any other war of this nation. in july of 1863, the middle of the civil war, our president, abraham lynn con -- lincoln, provided these official words for those who are on the supreme court and did not have a proper education about our history, these words might be surprising. but abraham lincoln made these an official proclamation when he said it is neat and right to

recognize and confess the presence of the almighty father and the power of his hand equally in these triumphs and in these sorrows. i invite the people of the united states to assemble on that occasion in their customary places of worship and in the forms approved by their own consciouses, render the homage due to the divine majesty, for the wonderful things he has done in this nation's behalf, and invoke the influence of his holy spirit to subdue the anger which produces and so long sustain a needless and cruel rebellion. johnson, october 28, 1865, as

president of the united states. he succeeded abraham lincoln, as we all know, after the terrible astrossity of abraham lynn -- atrocity of abraham lincoln's assassination. came at the end of such a cruel war that saw family member fighting and killing family member and so much destruction, so much hate. andrew johnson's official words as president of the united states in 1865 -- whereas it has pleased almighty god during the year which is now coming to an end, to relieve our beloved country from the fearful scourge of civil war and to permit us to secure the blessings of peace, unity and harmony with great enlargement

of civil liberty. and whereas our heavenly father has also during the year graciously averted from us the calamities of foreign war, pestilence and famine, while our grainries are full of the fruits of abundant season, and whereas righteousness exalted a nation, while sin is a reproach to any people, i recommend to the people thereof that they do set apart and observe the pictures thursday of december next as a day of national thanksgiving to the creator of the universe for those great deliverances and placings. ulysses s. grant as president,

responding as did those already mentioned and actually every president each and every year -- i selected official proclamations. this one was president ulysses s. grant, 1869. he said, i, ulysses s. grant, president of the united states, do recommend that thursday, the 18th day of november next, be observed as a day of thanksgiving and a praise and a prayer to almighty god, the creator and the ruler of the universe. and i do further recommend to all the people of the united states to assemble on that day in their accustomed places of public worship and to unite and

praise due to the bountiful god of all mercies and continuous prayers of the manifold blessings he vouched to us as a people. rutherford b. hayes, 1877. said these in his official proclamation -- the completed circle of summer and winter, seed time and harvest has brought us to the accustomed season at which a religious people celebrates with praise and thanksgiving the enduring mercy of almighty god. let us with one spirit and with one voice lift up praise and thanksgiving to god for his manifold goodness to our land,

his manifold -- manifest care for our nation. i earnestly recommend that withdrawing themselves from secular cares and labors the people of the united states do meet together on that day in their respected places of worship there to give thanks and praise to almighty god for his mercies and to devoutly beseach their continuance. chester a. arthur, november, 18 81. with the closing of the year, look back upon the blessings brought to them in the changing course of the seasons and return solemn thanks to the all-giving source for whom they flow. the countless benefits which

have showered upon us during the past 12-month call for our federal reservent gratitude making it -- fervent gratitude making it fitting that we rejoice with thanksgiving that the lord in his infinity mercy has -- infinite mercy has signaled our country and our people. that was chester a. arthur. grover cleveland in 1885 -- the american people have always abundant cause to be thankful to almighty god whose watchful care and guiding hands have been manifested in every stage of their national life, guarding and protecting them in time of peril and safely leading them in the hour of darkness and danger.

it is fitting and proper that a nation thus favored should on one day in every year for that purpose, especially appointed, publicly and knowledge the goodness of god and return thanks to him for all his gracious gifts. that was grover cleveland in his official proclamation of 1885. and again, there were proclamations every year by every president, so we're selecting just a few as it being fit and proper that as our country has done every year of its existence since we had a constitution in 1789 declaring a time of thanksgiving to god for our blessings.

benjamin harrison, this is november 1, 1889 -- now therefore i, benjamin harrison, president of the united states of america, do earnestly recommend that thursday, the 28th day of this present month of november, be set apart as a day of national thanksgiving and prayer and that the people of our country ceasing from the cares and labors of their working day, shall assemble in their respective places of worship and give thanks to god who has prospered us on our way and made our paths the paths of peace, beseaching him to bless the day to our present and future good, making it truly one of thanksgiving for each united home circle as for the nation at large. benjamin harrison, november,

1889. grover cleveland, november, 1893. said while the american people should every day remember with praise and thanksgiving the divine goodness and mercy which have followed them since their beginning as a nation, it is fitting that one day in each year should be especially devoted to the contemplation of the blessing we have received from the hand of god and to the grateful acknowledgment of his loving kindness. on that day let us forgo our ordinary work and employments and assemble in our usual places of worship where we may recall all that god has done for us and where from grateful hearts are united tribute of

praise and psalm may reach the thrown of grace. let the reunion of kind red -- kindred of the meeting of family and friends lead to the joiment of day and let generous gifts of charity for the -- joiment of day and let generous gifts of charity for the poor prove the sincerity of our thanksgiving. can't help but -- the pair theycally note -- parenthetically note that a blessing comes not from a government that forciblely takes people's money but from people who give from the bounty of their own hearts to those in need. it makes us better people. another. william mckinley in 1897

officially proclaimed in remembrance of god's goodness to us during the past year, which has been so abundant, he put in quotes, let us offer unto him our thanksgiving and pay our vows to the most high. unquote. mckinley went on. under his watchful providence, industry has prospered. the conditions of labor have been improved. the rewards of the husbandman have been increased. and the coverance of our homes multiplied. his mighty hand has preserved peace and protected the nation. respect for law and order has been strengthened. love of free institutions cherished, and all sections of our beloved country brought into closer bond of fraternal regard and generous cooperation.

for these great benefits, it is our duty to praise the lord in a spirit of humility and gratitude and to offer up to him our most earnest supplications that we may honor him who so graciously honored us the blessing of free government and material prosperity. william mckinley, october, 1897. theodore roosevelt as president of the united states said these words in 1903. officially proclaiming the season at hand when according to the custom of our people it falls upon the president to appoint a day of praise and thanksgiving to god.

during the last year, the lord has dealt bountifully with us, giving us peace at home and abroad and the chance for our citizens to work for their welfare unhindered by war, famine or plague. it behooves us not only to rejoice greatly because what has been given us but to accept it with a solemn sense of responsibility, realizing that under heaven it rests with us, ourselves, to show that we are worthy to use a right what has been entrusted to our care. in no other place and in no other time has the experiment of government of the people, by the people, for the people been tried on so vast a scale as

here in our own country in the opening years of the 20th century. failure would not only be a dreadful thing for us but a dreadful thing for all mankind, because it would mean loss of hope for all who believe in the power and the righteousness of liberty. therefore in thanking god for the mercies extended to us in the past, we beseech him that he may not withhold them in the future. that was theodore roosevelt, 1903. william howard taft, 1909. the people of the united states want to meet in their usual place of worship on a day of

thanksgiving to return thanks to god for the great mercies and benefits which they have enjoyed. . during the past year we have been highly blessed. it is all together fitting we should humbly and greatly acknowledge the divine source of those blessings. therefore, i hereby appoint a day of general thanksgiving and i call upon the people on that day laying aside their usual vowcailingses -- vocations to repair to their churches and unite in appropriate services of praise and thanks to almighty god. 1912, officially proclaim this without any problem from the

supreme court people claimed a god-fearing nation like ours owes it to its inborn and sincere sense of moral testify it's devout gratitude to the all-giver for the countless benefits it has enjoyed. for many years it has been customary at the close of the year for the national executive to call upon his fellow countrymen to offer praise and thanks to god for the man fold blessings tsh-manifold blessings. wherefore, william howard taft, president of the united states of america, in pursuance of a long established usage and in response to the wish of the american people invite my

countrymen where so ever they may so -- so juren, to join this thursday the 28th day of this month, november, an appropriate inscription of praise and thanks to god for the good gifts that have been apportioned and in humble prayer that his great mercies toward us may endure. it's worth noting william howard taft was the only person in american history to have been elected to congress, been elected president of the united states, and after making these official proclamations, every year as president of the united states, where he officially chided americans to thank god

for our blessings, he then became chief justice of the supreme court. the only one in our history to have been in congress, president, and on the supreme court, and in his case he was actually chief justice. he never failed to thank god officially, publicly as president of the united states. woodrow wilson, october of 1913, officially proclaimed this, the season is at hand in which it has been our long respected custom as a people to turn and praise in thanksgiving to almighty god for his manifold mercies and blessings to us as a nation. the year that has just passed has been marked in a peculiar degree by manifestations of his

gracious providence. we have seen the completion of a great work at theis must of panama which not only exemplifies the nation's abundant resources to accomplish what it will and the distinguished skill and capacity of its public servants, but also promises the beginning of a new age, of new contacts, of new neighborhoods, new sympathies, new bonds, and new achievements of cooperation in peace. and then woodrow wilson put these words in quotes, as he quoted from the holy bible, righteousness exalted a nation, unquote. and, and then wilson put in quote, peace upon earth, good will towards men, unquote. also from the holy bible.

furnish the only foundations upon which can be built the lasting achievements of the human spirit. now therefore i, woodrow wilson, president of the united states of america, do hereby designate thursday, the 27th of november next, as a day of thanksgiving and prayer. apparently he didn't know to say among the silence, he as every president before him commended a time to prayer. and invited the people throughout the land to cease from their wanted occupations and in their several homes and places of worship render thanks to almighty god. john f. kennedy, october of 1961 , officially proclaimed these

words. this was president kennedy's first thanksgiving proclamation, having become president some nine months earlier. he proclaimed, these words, the pilgrims after a year of hardship and peril humbly and ref rently setaside a special day upon which to give thanks to god. i ask the head of each family to recount to his children the story of the first new england thanksgiving. thus impress upon future generations the heritage of this nation born in toil, in danger, in purpose, and in the conviction that right and justice and freedom can, through

man's efforts, persevere and come to fruition with the blessing of god. and i will -- this will be the next to last, mr. speaker, but it is important, just as every president every year has proclaimed a day of thanksgiving to god, to our eternal and omnipotent source of all blessings. so every president has done it. president obama has done it. it is just so important that as we see surveys done of school children in america, high school students, college students, when

they are asked to who did the original pilgrims give thanks? so many say the indians, say each other. and not understand what's been part of our history since that early thanksgiving with the pilgrims when they set it aside to celebrate with the indians in gratitude to the indians, but the purpose was a proclamation of thanksgiving by every heart to almighty god. and as some try to rewrite our history, it must be said that for the nation's whole history each year was a proclamation of thanksgiving to god. and it's even worth noting, mr. speaker, that here in the house chamber where you and i are

dwelling right now, this chamber has the side profile above all the doors in the gallery of the greatest lawgivers in the history of man. some are sometimes surprised to see napoleon. he gave us the napoleonic code. louisiana still uses it as the basis of its law. there are popes who are considered great lawgivers of man died -- mankind. some have heard ofer the just continuin code. he's up there. the only one who is considered a great lawgiver, who does not have a side profile, is directly in front of you and above you, mr. speaker, because he was considered the greatest human lawgiver, so he is faced as a

full face, not a side profile, around which all the other great lawgivers as thought when this chamber was built, he was thought to be the greatest. he he he had 10 pretty good ones apparently, but that is the face of moses. i was noting as i listened in recent years to oral argument before the supreme court, as lawyers argued, including my friend, ted cruz, who is arguing on behalf of the state of texas, they were arguing as to why texas should be allowed to keep a monument on the state capitol grounds to the 10 commandments. and it was combined with a case from kentucky as to whether or

not kentucky should be allowed to keep a posting of the 10 commandments publicly posted. and as i listened to this great oral debate before the supreme court on whether or not there could be a calling out, a noting of the 10 commandments, i look as i looked at the court, i looked up on the marble wall, to my right, and there looking down on us carved into the marble wall was moses holding two tablets with hebrew written on the tablets. i have been told by people who have gotten tours over there, one individual said their tour guide, official tour guide, said moses is holding the 10 bill of

rights. but, mr. speaker, you and i know those were not the bill of rights. moses was holding and depicted as holding the 10 commandments. it's been a part of our history. i want to close before we conclude here with the first thanksgiving proclamation since we had a constitution. it was written 1787. it was ratified 1789. and as it says, as it is dated in the year of our lord, 1,787, washington had a thanksgiving

proclamation that he made, october 14 of 1789. and i wasn't sure -- i saw my dear friend, mr. southerland, did you wish to be recognized? so, mr. speaker, i will conclude with this before recessing for an official thanksgiving, the first thanksgiving proclamation by the father of our country, george washington, some have tried to rewrite history and say he was a deist. we know a deist is one who thinks there is some deity, some force that set things in motion, and then let nature take its course, and they believe that if such deity, if such force still

exists, such force never interferes with the way of nature or man. that's a deist. george washington was not a deist. his own words, official as they were, make that very clear. his words, his official proclamation, given the third day of october a.d., 1789, washington said, whereas it is the duty of all nations to acknowledge the providence of almighty god to obey his will, to be grateful for his benefits, and that means it's not a deist. he believed god provided this nation benefits. washington goes on and says, and

humbly to implore his protection and favor. whereas both houses of congress have by their joint committee requested me to quote, recommend to the people of the united states a day of public thanksgiving and prayer to be observed by acknowledging with grateful heart the many and single favors of almighty god, especially by affording them an opportunity peaceably to establish a form of government for their safety and happiness. now, therefore, i do recommend and assign thursday the 26th day of november next to be devoted by the people of these states to the service of that great and

glorious being, who is the beneficence author of all the good that was, that is, or that will be that we may then all unite in rendering unto him our sincere and humble thanks for his kind care. . and protection to the people of this country. previous to their becoming a nation, for the signal and manifold mercies, and the favorable interpositions of his providence, which we experienced in the course and conclusion of the late war, for the great degree of tranquility, union and plenty, which we have since enjoyed. for the peaceable and rational manner in which we have been enabled to establish

constitutions of government for our safety and happiness. and particularly the national one now lately instituted for the civil and religious liberty which -- with which we are blessed, and the means we have of acquiring and diffusing useful knowledge. and in general for all the great and various favors which he has been pleased to confer on us. and also that we may then unite in most humbly offering our prayers, our supplications to the great lord and ruler of nations and beseech him to pardon our national and other transgressions, to enable us all, whether in public or private stations, to perform

our several and relative duties properly and punctually, to render our national government a blessing to all the people, by constantly being a government of wise, just and constitutional laws, dissecretly and faithfully executed and obeyed, to protect and guide all sovereigns and nations, especially have been shewn kindness to us, and to bless them with good government, peace and concord, to promote the knowledge and practice of true religion and virtue and the increase of science among them and us and generally to grant unto mankind

such a degree of temporal prosperity as he alone knows to be best. george washington's official thanksgiving proclamation, october 14, in the year of our lord, 1789. and here before or as we finish and recess for thanksgiving, the visual day this year proclaimed by this year's president, president barack obama, i am, mr. speaker, profoundly grateful as all these presidents i've mentioned, thankful to god for my blessings. i know they're not earned. there was nothing i ever did in the womb to deserve to be born in the greatest country in the history, but i was blessed because generations before were

blessed and it's an honor to rise up and call them blessed for the opportunities that were given us through their devotion and thanksgiving and hard work and acknowledgment to god for our blessings. mr. speaker, i was blessed with an older sister, whom i love. i'm blessed with two younger brothers, one who died couple years ago, and for my youngest brother, bill, whose birthday will celebrate november 17. as a baptist pastor and my friend. and with that, mr. speaker, i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: does the gentleman have a motion?

mr. gohmert: mr. speaker, pursuant to senate concurrent resolution 60, 112th congress, i move that the house do now adjourn. the speaker pro tempore: the question is on the motion to adjourn. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the ayes have it. the motion is agreed to. pursuant to senate concurrent resolution 60, 112th congress, the house stands adjourned until 2:00 p.m. on tuesday, november 27, 2012.

reactions from peter king. here's a look. was he more forthcoming and then yesterday? >> is still not clear how the talking points and merge. he said it was a long process all lehman agencies. -- involving all different agencies. no one knows yet you came up

with the original talking points other them how the ones from the cia are there for them the one that were finally caught out. your petraeus's testimony today from the start told us that this was a terrorist attack. i had a different recollection of from that. the overwhelming amount of evidence was that it was that rose up of a spontaneous demonstration and it was not a terrorist attack. against, it was very cordial, if you will. we shook hands before and afterwards. >> can you tell us whether or

not his affair or the security of issues surrounding the affair came about all? >> the only hazard warning? -- he only answered oen questionand teh answer was no. >> what about the talking points? >> the final ones were indications of extremists. there was clearly evident to the cia that there was al qaeda involvement. they said it went through a long process. when they come back, that will be taking out. >> it was that surprising? realize the full significance of that. a gamble, it was still very vague. again, very cague.

>> did he relay any of your concerns? >> i told him that i disagreed with his recollection of what you told us about september 40th. no comments. not at all. >> did that make it hard to get down to the brass tacks? >> it was made clear the beginning of that will not be a focus of the question. . >> he went to libya so we obviously was giving you a bit of a report. is the right thing you can tell us that he clearly learned from being on the ground? >> that would all be classified. they now clearly believe that it did not arise out of a demonstration of, was lot

spontaneous, and was clearly a terrorist involvement. it is ongoing. obviously, the secretary of state, the secretary of defense, and people at the white house have changed the talking points. >> do you think you'll hear from him a gallon this? >> we will have to see. >> there is any explanation as to why it took them so long to come to that conclusion today docks >> there are many streams of intelligence but he stated that he made it clear role long -- clear all along but there was to arrest of involvement. >> the d.c. retired or worn down? >> he's a very strong soldier.

very professional, very knowledgeable, very strong. i spoke to him at the beginning in the end of the hearing in he is a solid guy. it made the question. tough, to be honest. >> how long did it last? >> sometimes in the hearing coming your adrenalin is pumping and you go back and forth. you going through an awful lot and we have an obligation to find out what we could. like when you guys ask those questions. >> the the speak with her before hand. >> no. the cia's of the talking points were drafted specifically about

the affiliation or terrorist activity was not in front of them, and that they would go to the process, whatever it is, which she seemed unclear about. >> how long did the hearing last? >> the opening statement was about 20 minutes? >> and what about the statements that paula broadwell made? >> no. again, and also went to the department of justice, the state department, and i believe the national security council. what did he talk about the videos and his interpretation? >> nothing controversial. >> to do is watch any films today? >> no. we saw that yesterday.

>> they were not involved. the process was completed and decided to go with those talking points. i get the impression to that there are about seven, eight, nine different agencies. >> the revised report said -- >> they showed up after the process and they were okayed it to go. >> what did he say? who does he think committed the attacks. >> al qaeda affiliate's. there's a certain amount of awkward as, sure. i've known him for nine years now

i know him fairly well. >> in your discussion of the national security and applications -- >> no. he just addressed what happened and that was basically it. >> was he involved in national decisionmaking the night of the attack. >> i do not want to get into that. he was fully aware of what was going on. >> and speak to the story that the first attack was spontaneous and the second became more organized. >> the spontaneous axa -- aspect is minimize right now. it was primarily a terrorist attack.

>> can you address how he interpreted the anti-muslim film and how that got to be part of the discussion? that was part of what was going on in this intelligence product? that other information later? >> yes. they also at the time that information that this was strong involvement with al-qaeda affiliates and now was not part of their presentation. >> to strains of intelligence. 11 was a protest evolving from the anti muslim video. was that what was described to you? >> yes. my recollection was that he was

minimizing the role of al- ansharia. >> thank you. >> speaking to reporters, the intelligence committee ranking democrat of maryland. >> he is going on "keep the press" this sunday -- >> meet the press" the sunday. it was very positive that general petraeus agreed to come before our committee. it was good for the country. it was good for our intelligence committee.

and it was good for general petraeus bring in closure to issues out there he needed to take care of and testify before our committee. we talked about the first briefing he gave us were there was a dispute about what he had said and i was at that hearing and basically he reinforce the fact that, for the first 24 hours, he felt that this was a protest as a result of what would happen of the film -- as a result of what happened with film in egypt. as more information came in, he knew it was not a protest. he also clarified that he made in the statement to us that there were extremists in the group and that they were al- qaeda affiliates. that was very important because that has been the debate for the last three or four weeks. >> mccain was just your saying

that his recollection is that maybe the director talk about extremist elements but he downplayed it big time. >> it is all about your perception and the information that you receive. when i was there and chairman rogers was not here, my recollection is deck we felt it was as a result of the protest and that was the beginning. the first thing you hear is maybe what he retained, but he also said that in the group there were extremists and some al-qaeda affiliates. that was set at the very beginning. whether it is or is not now, the fact is that he clarified it. and it goes to show that when you quiet -- that you try to get information out very quickly. congress will not hear about it, -- congress wanted to hear about it, the administration,

and the media. as soon as they receive additional information, they cleared a fact. arified. cleare >> if that was the description that it was a terrorist attack in the first 24 hours, was that information communicated and does that contradict the idea of spontaneous demonstration? >> if you look at the facts that we learned yesterday as far as the film is concerned, the first incident was a lot different than the second incident. when you look and see what was there, you have individuals coming into the compound who were looting. there was no command-and-control about evaluating where we going to go -- where we were going to go, how we were going to go. there were people sitting buildings on fire. the second incident was entirely

different, well-organized. people who had experience in attacking, al-qaeda and other extremist. deanwood they were doing. they knew how to shoot mortars and hit targets. there were two different types of cigarette rations -- types of situations, the first and the second. they got really well-organized and the amex was well controlled by the terrorists -- the annex was well controlled by the terrorists. intelligence is getting information as it comes. in the initial situation, this is what they understood. then the investigation involves and the fact that you could then start to interview the people on the ground, which was relevant and important. also getting the tape.

there was looking -- there was a lot of concern about the fbi and the fact they did not come back for two weeks. we had to rely in the beginning with an organized government who was working with us and that was the libyans themselves. >> and you explain why 5 days later, that was still the story? >> susan rice that some of the same information we did. when colin powell was with the united nations, he was getting information from the administration on the facts. i said they knew right away that there were terrorists involved in the operation. give it to me. >> if they knew within 24 hours it was terrorist related, how come 5 days later isusan rice ws

still saying it was spontaneous demonstration? >> i talked to susan rice and i assume she received information and he was not a part of a briefing susan rice. information comes together with different agencies involved in that jurisdiction. >> it was not a part of breeding season rice? he was head of the cia. >> he was part of putting together the information. he personally did not read susan rice. -- did not brief susan rice. let's get clarity here. the bottom line with the information that we got and susan rice got -- later on they found out that was not the case

, changed and said it was not the case. the other issue as far as susan rises concerned, she went before the administration, she made congress. i did not talk to susan writes. all i know is what she said as she received a lot of the same information we did. >> the briefing on september 14, was that before the whole committee? >> petraeus briefed the committee. we're having the ranking players involved in jurisdiction and the state department, i assume homeland security. i'm getting ready to go there. >> he seemed satisfied with what general petraeus told you today. it pla your concerns? >> i think he stated exactly what he said, clarified what he said in the first hearing.

yes, he did. he was at that time head of the cia. we also talked about his trip to libya, which was also important. our role is to follow the facts. away from the media hype and bottom-line determine what the facts are and question him under oath to make sure that occurred, both republicans and democrats and that what we did today. >> why did he change the assessment from st. brigid to saying it was of qaeda involvement from a spontaneous -- to saying it was al-qaeda involvement from a spontaneous reaction? >> because we got new information. >> reference the al-qaeda that

stripped out by state doj -- >> i was not aware that they were knocked down, the talking points. >> reference the scandal -- was there mention of the scandal that led to general petraeus's resignation? >> there was mention of the scandal. he said he was very sorry and is personal situation had nothing to do without handled the situation. and the story. -- end of story. >> did he say there were no national security issues in regards to the scandal? >> we did not get into that. >> was a condition that he not

be out in public? the media has not seen him at all. >> i did not talk about the conditions. >> but that is an administration issued. >> you tried to protect and so we could not get a shot of him. was that part of the deal? >> i talked to him for 5 minutes before the hearing. that is all i know. the think it is important for closure, important for the country and our committee. you're heading -- your head of the cia at the time of benghazi, let's get to the facts and you are the only one that can really do this. let's bring closure to this situation. i thank him for his service and that was it. >> you do not know of any

profession or arrangements? no. you try to come up quickly with an assessment. a lot of information can change. that is what occurred here. we want to get it right. intelligence is an evil in process. there were people who were injured in the incident who were interviewed later on in germany. that was more information. the most important thing was the real-time information we got yesterday, seeing the film of

the first attack. that clarify a lot of issues. ]> [indiscernible >> i assume it is the same group that came in yesterday. >> [indiscernible] >> will have some type of

special operations. general petraeus is one of the few people in our country who has military experience and also has the intelligence experience. those two combinations made him very important and relevant and qualified. i would hope that he has the opportunity -- we have the opportunity to have and give his advice in certain situations. >> the you know by when you definitely knew it was a terrorist attack? >> i think from the very beginning they thought there were people who were there who were affiliated with al-qaeda. we note that that was a very hostile area. -- we know that that was a very hostile area. the radicals in the area and that was a concern to us. and that was why initially he intelligence information said that it was a hot spot and we had to be on high alert.

anything else? i have got to go back. >> he said his resignation -- he said he said his resignation had nothing to do with benghazi. >> he made the statement, someone asked him, or maybe he said this at the beginning. he said basically his resignation had nothing to do with it a gauzy -- the benghazi issue. >> adding another angle to the bank of east for it, marcia fudge today said that -- to the

benghazi issue, marcia fudge today defended ambassador rice again some republicans who said she lied to the american public regarding to the attack on the american consulate in benghazi. this is just over a half an hour. >> i want to thank members of the press for joining us today. a few of our female colleagues talk about the disrespectful attacks to our representative to the united nations, susan rice. we have an expert -- a distinguished member here who was in a committee meeting, delegate eleanor holmes morton, and she must return to the meeting, so i'm going to yield to my to her before i introduce

this topic more thoroughly and introduce this group that has assembled today. >> i appreciate the typical generosity of the chair of our democratic caucus. i appreciate that you have brought us together. i think i can say without fear of contradiction that we're speaking for many women members of congress and we are speaking for many members of congress regarding ambassador season rice. i happen to know susan rice well because she is a constituent and i have followed her extraordinary career from the time she was a child. some members of the senate seem to be unable to contain themselves while we await two ongoing investigations into the tragic attacks in benghazi, libya, which took the lives of

four americans, including the ambassador to libya. they have rushed forward to try to shoot the messenger, prejudge the investigation, and block considerations of ambassador susan rice to be considered for secretary of state. the committee will on which i sit called a rare hearing during our recess where republicans scoffed at the irrefutable evidence that ambassador rice relied on intelligence from the office of the national director of intelligence. at the hearing, i introduced the statement on the intelligence from the office of the national director of intelligence, which

said, and i want to quote -- here is the intelligence director speaking -- "in the immediate aftermath, there was information that led us to assess that the attack began spontaneously following protests earlier that day at our embassy at cairo. we provided. the wee is the intelligence director. we use that information to discuss it intelligently. we continue to emphasize that the information gathered was preliminary and evil thing." end quote. i then asked ambassador patrick kennedy of the state department,

who testified at the hearing, whether he had any reason to doubt that ambassador rice had relied on the information from the national intelligence director. he replied, "know, and misses morton. when i came up to give a briefing earlier this week, both of us were relying on the same information. if i or any other senior administration official, career or non-career, would have been on that television show other than susan rice, we would have said the same thing because we were drawing on the same intelligence information that was then available to us.

this has been, as you all know, an evolving situation. what we knew that first week and that first weekend had evolved over time. we know much more now than we knew then. we have no report from the ongoing investigation. there are two of them outstanding. but we have the accusatory senators. and we must ask them, have they bother to even look at the existing record? what motivates their pre-emptive judgment of a brilliant woman who has been a career diplomat, assistant secretary for african affairs, the youngest in our history, whose record led her to her presidential appointment as you and ambassador -- u.n.

ambassador. in both of these positions, she has been independent and undeterred by ideology. most recently she advise the president that the united states should go into libya on the side of the rebels. susan rice has more than earned every office and every honor she has received, striving for and achieving top honors in high school academics here in washington as a phi beta kappa graduate of stanford university, as a rhodes scholar, as a ph.d. from oxford, and as a brilliant, tough-minded diplomat. we do not attend to stand by while ambassador rice, who had nothing to do with the tragic benghazi attack or its aftermath, it is made the scapegoat of the tragedy because

she relate to the public the only official intelligence that was available to the administration at the time. the rush to judgment against the ambassador is particularly unprofessional and reckless considering that the intelligence irrefutably documents her public remarks. we will not allow a brilliant public servant's record to be mugged to cut off her consideration to become secretary of state. i very much appreciate being able to speak for susan rice. >> we have been honored to hear from a senior member of our caucus, the distinguished eleanor holmes norton. i am the co-chair of the women's study group, and while all of

the women who are assembled here are not going to speak, i would be remiss not to note some of the distinguished people who are here. we had susan davis, who is a very high ranking official on the armed services committee representing san diego, california. is that right? good. [laughter] we have barbara lee, who has become renowned in her outspokenness about the wars in afghanistan and iraq and really did lead the charge toward ending the war in iraq. we also have done a christian islands. the virgin bal

we have heard a great deal from delegate eleanor holmes norton, so i will give you the short version of all the things she said. what unmitigated gall for these men to attack the permanent representative to the united nations, susan rice. we understand that all of us have been disappointed in one way or another about the results of the election, but to factor this woman -- to batter this woman because they do not feel they have had the ability to batter president obama is something we are not going to stand by and watch. they are feckless -- their feckless and reckless

speculation is unworthy of their offices as senators. there was a time when i regarded mr. mccain as a gentleman. i am sad that this is not one of those moments. we see this great senator rushing off to a press event rather than going to the briefing on the facts. in his zeal to bend and ran -- to vent and rant as a result of the elections. the comments that she is not so bright, that she is untrustworthy -- these are comments that beg the question, when you look at her laudable resonate, much of which you heard from our distinguished delegates holmes nortmorton.

so we are asking for them to walk back those comments. joining me here -- and i'm going to stop my comments at this point and call upon my good friend, the just elected chair of the congressional black caucus, rip marsha fudge from the district of ohio. -- rep. marcia fudge from the district of ohio. >> i am going to be brief also. i know when you lose, you get angry. but do not take it out on someone who had nothing to do with a loss. glenn yourself. how you say that someone was susan rice's background is not qualified? where did you finish in your class? i know one of them finished in

the bottom of their class. susan rice was a rhodes scholar. how you say a person like susan rice is not qualified? you may not like her. he may not like the administration. but do not say she is not qualified. she is the most qualified person that i am sure any of you know, that these senators know. how you say that a person who has served this country with the distinction she has is not qualified? i am confused. because none of it makes any sense, to just throw out the things. susan rice's comments did not susan rice's comments did not send